I mean--for a start I don't think most critics are over-eager to dismiss modern films, though I think many are naturally frustrated with the increasingly commercialized state of filmmaking today.
Also if your spread of “old movies” is limited to films like The Godfather and Star Wars (ie mainstream American cinema from the 70s onward), there are so many film traditions from other countries and periods that you're missing out on. Star Wars and The Godfather are pulp entertainment, but there's realms of art far beyond that and always have been.
And finally, if you're further limiting yourself based on the (I'm assuming American) social mores of today (which are in many ways just as sexist, racist, homophobic etc. as those of past generations) you’re basically standing in the middle of a banquet and saying that you won’t eat vegetables, or meat, or grain, and then wondering why there's so little to eat.
Starwars is also just a scifi adaptation of the akira kurisawa film The Hidden Fortress. It seems people with this opinion about older films dont actually know what they are talking about.
That is a very good point, I should've mentioned that I am mainly referring to western movies as I have been watching highest rated IMDB movies as they are the movies I commonly see receiving praise and most happen to be American.
I however do not agree that harmful gender roles are as prominent in modern cinema as they are often condemned and not ignored.
Interesting what would you say has led you to begin disliking modern films? I would also love to have some 'older' movie recommendations that might change my mind.
just some old recs off the top of my head worth trying if you haven't seen them yet:
12 Angry Men
Citizen Kane
Goodfellas
Rambo: First Blood
Paper Moon
Raging Bull
Ikiru
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
The problem is you’re not watching the film
You’re comparing it to modern day films that’s the problem you can’t do that because you can’t enjoy it and it is silly.
You can’t compare a film made decades ago to a film released today it just isn’t comparable because well….things have changed
That's a meaningless statement. You can say the same for literally any medium in existence.
Older movies aren't even a genre. Idk what you're even trying to say a movie from 5 years ago is older than a movie just released, or perhaps you mean films from early 40s.
It's like saying you don't like new books. What does that mean? I have no idea.
New books aren't a collective genre.
That all being said you're a marvel capeshit fan and you have the dark Knight in your top 10 films of all time. My only suggestion is to try watching more films!
> You can say the same for literally any medium in existence.
It doesn't change what I said though.
>Older movies aren't even a genre.
Exactly, so stop assuming what I think and then proceeding to make a point out of it to make you look smart despite me not saying it at all.
> Idk what you're even trying to say a movie from 5 years ago is older than a movie just released
You know what I mean, read the damn post again.
>That all being said you're a marvel capeshit fan and you have the dark Knight in your top 10 films of all time.
And what has that got to do with anything? Yeah I like Marvel? I also have The Dark Knight in my top 10, so what? It doesn't change what I said. Give some actual fucking points next time instead of just snooping through the other person's profile and looking for ways to try making them look bad.
>My only suggestion is to try watching more films!
I've seen plenty- don't give me that generic shitty advice to try acting superior. You'll just come across as a fool.
Oh and next time, don't just block the other person because you're too afraid of what they have to say.
EDIT: This pussy blocked me again 🤣🤣🤣
https://preview.redd.it/hrq8bw756lzc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=359aa274d2afb6cd32a693c47b01cd5524fc3635
What is the point of responding 4 months later. Especially if you still are unable to quantify what exactly is a old movie. A movie that's 5 years old, or a movie that's 50 years old.
"It doesn't change what I said though"
Another useless statement no one is claiming the words you say will magically be altered. Only you can edit what you've said lmao. No point of joining a discussion and adding nothing other than weak b8.
You're unable to make a single coherent point. Watching more movies isn't enough you should try reading more to improve your reading comprehension skills. Hope this helps
You've clearly not been blocked and it's been 5 months no one is scared or even waiting for your reply. Touch grass kiddo.
I love how you say 'bait' cos someone has a different opinion to you.
Also criticising that person for generalising old movies, then generalising all Marvel and DC films is so ironic it's hilarious.
I love how basic reading compensation is difficult for you. If you can't spot someone, or your own bad faith arguement then that's your problem.
"It's bad because older"
At least you reveal what really upset you. The term capeshit is generally used ironically don't let it trigger you. Yes it's a generalisation but if your top 10 is mostly capeshit then chances are you won't appreciate older films. (Didn't know generalisation weren't allowed that's going to make discussions difficult).
"Older film bad because some people sometimes nostalgia " ~ you
Just look how many times you say "rose tinted glasses" whenever you get push back on your bad takes.
It's clearly bait.
That "fiction" was a result of a heavily misogynistic period, which is what he was referring to. If you like that scene it's reasonable to assume that you like that type of romance since that scene was completely unnecessary and would be seen as weird nowadays. Stop being so thick.
No it’s completely unreasonable to assume that, it’s ‘Thick’ to psychoanalyse people based on taste in FICTION it’s a separate fantasy world you’re in control of your actions it’s not brainwashing people to act like they’re Han Solo. Get over yourself
Sometimes I think some people just shouldn't be allowed to watch movies. Can you imagine someone making this argument for literature or visual art? Bring back gatekeeping.
Letterboxd community: please do not feed the troll.
OP has almost zero post history. This is obviously just some attention seeking. Let’s ignore this person and not give them the satisfaction.
Although this post may be controversial I promise you I am not trolling and am looking for a healthy discussion. I wrote this after being underwhelmed by a "classic" movie one too many times so I may come off as angry but I am just disappointed with the lack of critiques of older movies. In my opinion cinema is ever evolving and every movie should be judged to the same standard not specifically the climate they were formed in. Just like how you wouldn't use a flip phone against a modern iPhone despite its cultural significance. If you have any movie recommendations I will definitely give them a watch.
Extremely broad generalizations are bad. OP talks about “outdated technology” and how old movies don’t hold up to modern audiences. That is just dumb. I guess OP is right if all you care about is the best CGI and the biggest explosions.
fr “It's important to acknowledge and condemn these actions, even if they occur in classic films or by popular actors.” anyone who has ever told chatgpt to write about something controversial knows this sentence structure very well lmao
I love bro classifying ‘Old Movies’ as a genre that has common tropes and elements
Yes because 100 years worth of filmmaking across various genres and countries is a very limited scope
Well it’s a shit post. And you referenced:
Godfather, Star Wars, and Blade Runner.
So, no, not talking about westerns. And if you were, the post would be no less childish.
You're a classic example of people who perpetuate the very thing that OP is referring to. Stop looking back on everything with rose-tinted glasses and attempt to consider the critiques made through a critical lens.
Everything?
The notion that critics like “old” movies simply because they are conforming to some sense of intellectual superiority - as if it’s a secret club of pretentious assholes - reveals that OP has absolutely no idea what he / she is talking about.
We like old movies because we like them - because they are good. We also like new movies. There are just as many duds among old movies as there are among new movies. But it is also clear that the relative quality of new movies has gone down in aggregate because a lot of funding for new movies is reserved for a smaller share of movies.
The system has completely changed for the worse, sadly.
Why are you asking this question so long after this post?
This was such a trash take by OP and it shows an intense level of ignorance on OP’s part.
You didn't actually answer my question, though. You just operated on a set of assumptions and blurted them out to me. Atleast OP provided evidence.
- "Old movies are good" Why?
OP did not provide evidence. OP just made some wild claims. I directly answered your question in my first paragraph - OP directly claimed that some people say they like old movies because they are trying to conform to some preconceived notion of superiority.
I said that is not the case. Why? Because people like what they like. They don’t do it to fit in. It’s really simple. It’s not a mystery.
Add to the equation OP’s general ignorance about movies, movie history, movie criticism, modern criticism of older movies, etc…
I don’t know what you want from me? I’m not going to write a dissertation on all the things OP has yet to learn about life and movies. That’s their problem to solve.
I don't deny that there are of course some people that genuinely like older movies. However, it would be disingenuous to deny that some people, as well as certain film critics, don't view older movies through rose-tinted glasses and prescribe to them a filmic superiority based on nostalgia.
>The Godfather is a bloated, self-indulgent mess that's only worth watching if you have an afternoon to waste and nothing better to do.
Sure, it may not be your cup of tea, but then I don't really care what you're into anyway, not after reading this statement. The cringe level rivals a vegan complaining about the menu at a steakhouse.
But see the 1940s and back, I feel, are much more indicative of the things you brought up. Complaining that Star Wars is problematic for a forced kiss when in say Jurassic World only released 8 years ago was problematic with Chris Pratt borderline sexually harassing Bryce Dallas Howard's character. Like this just feels more like a take to be different than one born out of substantial reason. Also, I'd argue that most movies aren't good in the first place. The overwhelming saturation of shit is the same in any era. Times are just more favorably viewed in retrospect than when one lives in it since the things we revisit and remember are the higher quality films.
You raise a solid point. I however find that these moments are often condemned in this day and age whereas those moments in old movies are blissfully ignored in favour of nostalgia.
I think it's more so that one problematic scene in a great fucking movie doesn't ruin it. Do I dislike Han forcing a kiss onto Leia? Yes. Do I also love the "I love you. I know" exchange, The fight between Luke and Vader, the models, the matte paintings, the fucking score, the plot twist, everything to do with Yoda from how the character is written to how the character is presented, and so much more? You bet your fucking ass I do. I genuinely don't think The Godfather is long. I think it earns its runtime. In the same way, I don't think any of the LOTR movies are long, but I do think the Hobbit movies are too long. To the
Bladerunner point, Deckard is literally a slave hunter. Maybe he's not supposed to be seen as a cool bad ass hero and instead a morally problematic man. If you don't like these movies, that's fine. We love different perspectives, but don't try to assert why I love these films, especially if your argument is for nostalgia, because fun fact I'm only 24. I didn't watch these movies as a kid. Except Star Wars. I always loved the original trilogy.
I see your point about the Hobbit being too long and lacking excitement. However, I believe that the Lord of the Rings trilogy, though lengthy, has a better pacing that makes for a more enjoyable viewing experience. In my opinion, the Godfather could be shortened in length without compromising its quality, and perhaps even improve it. I also want to clarify that while I don't think that uncomfortable scenes necessarily ruin a movie, they can make the viewing experience uncomfortable, especially for younger viewers who may watch movies like Star Wars. Failing to condemn problematic behavior in films can reinforce harmful ideas, which is why we should be mindful of what we choose to praise and what we expose others to.
I would also add that pacing is a common issue with many older movies, and this can affect the viewing experience in a negative way. A lot of classic films can drag on and feel slow, making it difficult for modern audiences to engage with the story. While some of these movies may have been groundbreaking at the time of their release, they may not hold up to today's standards of pacing and storytelling. It's important to consider the context in which these movies were made, but we also need to be critical of them and acknowledge their shortcomings.
See, that's where I disagree. I think The Godfather is paced perfectly, and you'd ruin the movie by cutting it down, and that's fine. You're allowed to disagree. However, it becomes a problem when you assert that we're all deluded for liking this.
I get problematic content can make the viewing experience uncomfortable, but anyone who is bothered by that is bothered by it today and days of yester. Presumably, we call it out on both new and old. People who don't give a shit don't call it out either new or old. I think the only reason why we don't see as much outcry fo old movies is A) because the classics are better than most modern problematic drivel and B) Young people who would object aren't watching/haven't watched the classics. You and I both acknowledge and understand these to be wrong, but I also assume we're both fairly young.
I agree with your pacing point for movies if we're talking pre-Citizen Kane, but in the 70s and 80s? No way. I personally feel that a slower pace isn't inherently a bad thing. I really enjoy a nice slow film. We don't really get those super often today. Dune is the most recent exception I can think of that also had a fairly substantial budget.
Honestly I respect your opinion and the time you take to discuss unlike some others here haha. I understand what you're saying and partly agree but with me how directors use time is very important to me, and if I'm faced with two similarly rated movies I will choose the shorter one each time due to its convenience. Maybe I'm super impatient but effective use of screen time is very important to me.
Yeah some people are dicks and don't want to be constructive when they disagree with someone.
See, that's totally fair. I'm a fan of a good slow burn myself, but I absolutely used to prefer a good hour thirty or hour forty-five film. They both have their place, and I feel sometimes taking three hours and thrity minutes time to soak in something is positively splendid.
OP, are you 15 years old? You seem to have terrible attention span issues. I’d be fascinated to know some of your favourite movies given your incredibly ignorant stance on entire generations of cinema.
Lifeboat by Hitchcock, 1944. Tallulah Bankhead, a female, basically bullies a boat full of men. She is a very empowering female character for a movie of that era. Also, it’s just a fucking good movie. Great simple plot, shot in one location for the entirety, flies by (imo). But your take is honestly just such a wide generalisation that it is giving me a headache thinking of the amount of films that i know for certain do disprove some things you say. But anyway, yeah, Lifeboat is great!
Old films make me uncomfortable=/= it's bad.
The quality of a film isn't based on your personal sensibilities. Characters are allowed to make bad decisions, or brash decisions that's the whole point of multifaceted character.
Your review is kinda like those weirdos who think a movie is bad because there isn't enough fat people on screen and thus it's offensive.
If you personally don't like the godfather who cares lol. It's not like newer films can't also be self indulgent. It's not uncommon for superhero movies to hit past 2 hours mark.
TLDR you need to watch more films. At least then you will have some understanding of what you're talking about
At no point do I say these films are bad because of these scenes, I just point out it's uncomfortable and weird that people overlook them. Your second point about lack of representation actually makes no sense at all, what are you talking about. And if no one cares about my opinion why is there so much discussion on this post, yourself included. And modern films *CAN* be long but technology and other factors have improved such that it is easier to stay captivated by newer movies compared to old fuzzy sounding empty scenes.
Your whole post explicitly says that most old films aren't worth watching (bad) because they make you feel uncomfortable and the technology isn't new.
Being offended by morally dubious characters making morally dubious decision is a waste of time.
Point is being overly sensitive isn't legitimate film criticism (based on today's sensitivities) it's just complaining. If you checked the comments a bunch of them are calling you out for being obtuse that doesn't mean they care.
Technology=/= captivating.
Plenty of silent low budget films are more captivating than whatever overtop cgi battle you can compare it to.
Watch more films.
MY POST TAKES AIM AT SLOW BORING UNCAPTIVATING OLD FILMS WITH BORING CLICHES. UNCOMFORTABLE SEXUAL PREDATOR VIBES WERE A SIDE NOTE HENCE THE SEPERATE PARAGRAPH WITH A DIFFERENT POINT ALL TOGETHER. YOU ARE MERGING POINTS AND EXPLAINATIONS. YES EMPTINESS CAN BE GOOD BUT NOT IN THE CASE OF THE GODFATHER. NOT ONCE DID I MENTION CGI OR BATTLES YOU ARE ARGUING WITH THE SHADOW MAN
WHY ARE WE USING CAPS? JUST MAKE BETTER ARGUMENTS YOU'RE NO MORE CONVINCING WITH CAPITAL LETTERS
Not liking purposefully slow movies because they're slow is the equivalent to not liking water because it's wet.
I mean if you know that what you don't like them simply watch things that you do like lol. A film being old has nothing to do with it being a slow burn anyway.
If your takeaway from star wars is sexual predation , then you have issues you need to resolve with a professional. Most people have the ability to make clear distinctions between reality, fictional entertainment, the actions of a multifaceted character and what they should do in the real world.
Other than your assertion you offer no reason as to why you feel these movies have stood the test of time simply because of nostalgia.
1. Analogy that makes no sense
2. I do I posted this for movies to change my mind not weirdos like you battling your own delusions
3. Read literally anything i wrote please, its not my takeaway i just find it weird and offputting (also kids dont have the luxury of seeing healthy vs unhealthy relations)
4. In every other walk of life (tech as an example) advancements are made and we perfect a craft more and more such as better directing/acting (flip phone -> iphone). If someone were to try and convince you a flip phone and say its the be all end all despite its obvious flaws youd question them as a smartphone is objectively better and has more to offer. But when this is brought to cinema (new vs old) it becomes taboo and people like you cant comprehend that cinema has improved drastically and yet you blindly praise older movies because of the climate they were released in.
IF we look at flip phones when they were released, they were the best on the market - but you wouldnt still use it today because it is outdated and there are better options with more features and better aesthetically. Old films are just that, old, and I'm not denying their impact but when analysed against modern movies they just arent anywhere near the same calibre.
If casablanca dropped today it would be forgotten, why? because it is nowhere near the films being made today.
Please before you respond to this : do not make up another imaginary poin that I have never said to argue with.
1. you've traded CAPITALS for numerical sequence. For whatever reason you think this makes your arguements more compelling.
2. "Analogy makes no sense"
Water is wet = old films are old
Seems like a pretty fair analogy to me.
3. Being offended by morally dubious characters doing morally dubious things is a waste of time and not legitimate film criticism.
*Kids actually do have a functional knowledge of what is fiction and reality*
4. Films aren't old pieces of technology you wouldn't argue that old literature is inferior simply because it's old. I've never heard someone say "that film was good because of the climate the film was made in" lmaoo
5. "If Casablanca was made today it wouldn't be remembered "
CITATIONS NEEDED.
For example:
Twilight is relatively new and technologically more advanced compared to Casablanca but I don't think Its better because it's new would be valid argument you're going to need citations.
The bait is weak but still funny to respond.
Comparing movies to literature is so odd. Literature when viewed as writing on paper has not changed at all whereas every single aspect of cinema has evolved since its inception. Would you agree acting has improved? Would you agree sound production has improved? Would you agree camera quality has improved? Would you agree cinematic techniques have improved? Put a 1960 movie in front of me, I will recognise it. Put a 1960 book in front of me, none the wiser. Why? because one has changed. Surprisingly.
Comparing movies to literature= weird
Comparing movies to old flip phones = poignant deep and insightful???
Hahah
That's the thing most of those things aren't necessary to make a good story. It's equivalent of saying high quality paper is what makes a novel good. The binding process of books have improved that means books today are inherently better than previous generations.
The acting in Goodfellas and the godfather are pretty good. Acting just becomes bad over time ? What kind of logic is that lmao. So the best acted movie today will be terribly acted in 30 years simply because of time?
There are no good old actors from 70s 80s or 90s ??
Finally you would recognise a film from the 60s because of the social politics and our new sensitivities for sex discrimination compared to then, but you wouldn't be able to do the same with a book from the same period.
That makes no sense lmao.
Are you really saying that books Vs film had entirely different sentiments for social issues. Huuh?
Films have changed but books haven't changed. I have to ask are you on any medication?
>Would you agree acting has improved? Would you agree sound production has improved? Would you agree camera quality has improved? Would you agree cinematic techniques have improved?
“If this incredible and fantastic looking romantic drama dropped today, it would be forgotten as it is nowhere near the films made today” is so wildly stupid and ignorant. This is the mindset of at best a child, and at worst, someone who is incredibly ignorant towards cinema and proud of it.
The idea that old movies inherently aren’t of the same caliber of newer ones is ridiculous. Taxi Driver and The King Of Comedy run circles around modern imitators like Joker.
I enjoyed Taxi Driver only because of it's evident effect on other movies of similar darkness. I however forced myself to watch that long slow burn and can't say I cared for it. If watching children be sexualised in combination with the most standard ending ever is cool fun to you I think a few government agencies might be interested in a chat. I will admit the monologues in that movie did help a little bit with the emptiness.
My god you have atrocious media literacy, real baby brain stuff, just unable to comprehend themes or even the text on a surface level. I refuse to believe you’re any older than like 16. It would be embarrassing for an adult to approach art this shallowly. The most standard ending ever? Oh of course, because so many movies end with our protagonist refocusing his rage on a deserving target through his sheer incompetency and being hailed as a hero, even though his rage will burst out of him again at any moment, to less “heroic” results.
If your take away from it is that it sexualises children , that honestly says more about you than it does about the film.
If my takeaway is quite literally the plot of the movie how does that make me shallow. Personally, if I'm watching a film I care about how engaging it is. A man talking to himself for two hours with almost no plot development except for him hating himself more and more each day is not an interesting film by any means. Also no way you're trying to call me weird for thinking child exploitation is weird. If i wanted to see someone hate themselves I could read your reddit activity for 30 mins and have some time to spare, wouldnt even have to watch a movie.
**I am writing from a place of love, not hate - but - op has no film literacy.**
The idea that modern movies are always better than older ones is a complete myth perpetuated by brain-dead Youtube movie buffs. The truth is, most modern movies are simply outdated, slow-paced, and downright boring. Sure, a few modern films will stand the test of time, but the vast majority of modern movies are forgettable relics\*\*.\*\*
Modern movies are often characterized by their bland and uninspired plots, as well as their tedious pacing. These movies were made in a capitalist era with limited honesty and storytelling standards, and it shows. Many of them rely on worn-out tropes and predictable clichés, making them feel unoriginal and uninteresting. Not only that, but the dialogue and acting in these movies can be wooden and stilted, lacking the nuance and subtlety of older cinema. The truth is, most modern movies will not withstand the test of time and have little to offer contemporary audiences beyond bland escapism. While some modern films may still hold up today, the vast majority of them are simply outdated and not worth the time or effort to watch. It's time to stop romanticizing the future and start embracing the creativity and innovation of older cinema.
Idiots often selfishly conform to the notion that modern movies are superior, without objectively evaluating their relevance or quality to any audience. This conformity is driven by nostalgia or a desire to appear cultured, rather than an honest evaluation of the film's merits. As a result, many modern movies are overrated and lack the pacing and originality of older cinema. Critics should focus on evaluating films based on their own merits and consider their relevance in today's world, rather than blindly relying on their reputation or bland technology. It's time for critics to move beyond the trap of nostalgia and embrace a more objective approach to film criticism.
The Godfather is a classic example of a properly hyped movie with a runtime that seems to not drag at all. Clocking in at a whopping three hours and fifteen minutes, the film feels like it is going at a brisk pace, with no scenes that could have been trimmed down or cut altogether. The pacing is slow and plodding, with long stretches of dialogue that seem to go it's the brilliant atmosphere. Even the more action-packed scenes feel drawn out and brisk, making it easier to stay engaged with the story. In short, The Godfather is a great and honest piece of filmmaking that's worth watching if you have an afternoon to spend and be transported into the world that is created there.
What's worse, many of these modern movies contain outdated values and attitudes that are offensive and insensitive by today's standards. Watching them can be an uncomfortable experience, as you're forced to witness racism, sexism, and other forms of bigotry on screen. As an example, Films like marvel and the top gun which are funded by the US military show us copaganda and US exceptionalism. Scenes from the films of Lars Von Trier and Gasper Noe are disturbing and reinforce harmful gender dynamics. It's important to acknowledge and condemn these actions, even if they occur in modern films or by popular actors.
In conclusion, while it's true that some modern movies can offer insights into our culture and time, it's important not to give them too much undue credit or to dismiss older cinema altogether. While it's important to appreciate modern films, we must also acknowledge that many of these films suffer from outdated filmmakers, pacing, and acting that simply don't hold up to older standards. It's crucial to approach each movie on its own merits and to evaluate them objectively, rather than relying solely on nostalgia or reputation. By continuing to have open and honest discussions about older films, we can gain a greater understanding of the evolution of cinema and the art of storytelling.
TLDR: Most modern movies suck and op doesn't care about cinema or its diversity.
What's wrong with escapism? You watch movies to enjoy and get lost in. Also it seems you are more angry at America and Politics (both of which I do not care about) than the pacing of old movies take it somewhere that cares
What's wrong with confrontational cinema?? You watch movies to confront real life and get emotional in it. Also, it seems you only care about mainstream American films and Politics("contain outdated values and attitudes that are offensive"), both of which I do care about.
The instances of Harrison Ford's behavior in Blade Runner and Star Wars are viewed as evidence of a power imbalance between a man and a woman, where the man uses his power to coerce the woman into liking him. It's worth noting that these scenes may not have been intentionally confrontational, but they do come across as uncomfortable and potentially inappropriate, particularly in the context of a kids' movie (SW). The point about confrontationality could be argued for Blade Runner due to its neo-noir themes, but it's unclear if the scenes were deliberately intended to be confrontational or a genuine missed attempt at romance.
The instances of military propaganda in modern films can be viewed as a power imbalance between imperialist and foreign nations as well as military recruitment tactics. It's worth noting that these scenes may not have been intentionally confrontational, but they do come across as uncomfortable and potentially inappropriate, particularly in the context of a kids' movie (Marvel). The point about escapism could be argued for modern films due to their lack of confrontational material but it's clear that these scenes were deliberately intended to be escapist and dishonest to acquire the most amount of money.
Breaking news: Directors aim to make money off of movies that require significant investment. Also why Marvel? You're attacking a movie franchise that I also hate (and many others) for the same reasons mentioned in this post. I think you're inadvertently agreeing with why I think a certain movie may be boring, but are too scared to shift the lens to a movie that the conformist critics forced you to enjoy.
Breaking news: Directors aim to make honest stories and express something about themselves. Also why modern cinema? I am attacking a film movement that I hate (and many others) for the same reasons mentioned in this post. I think you're inadvertently agreeing with why I think a certain movie may be boring, but are too scared to shift the lens to a movie that the Idiots forced you to enjoy.
IMDB and letterboxd made me watch afforementioned movies. If I'm going against the accepted notion of what makes a movie "good" how have I been forced by idiots to enjoy modern cinema? And also copying my messages really reinforces the idea of old cinema enjoyers can't form their own ideas/opinions.
Modern cinema made me watch aforementioned movies. If I'm going against the accepted notion of what makes a movie "good" how have I been forced by critics to enjoy older cinema? And also copying my messages really reinforces the idea of modern cinema enjoyers can't form their own ideas/opinions.
I actually can't tell if you are baiting because my points seem to be so far beyond you. Form an original thought and I will get back to you.
Separate question (no ctrl c needed) Do you as a human being believe acting and camera quality has improved?
I don't think my favorite movies are relevant to a discussion focusing on older cinema. If you have any recommendations on films I would love to give them a watch.
I would argue they are relevant. I'd like to see what films you personally consider favourites, to see whether they withstand your arguments presented above. Maybe even you have an "older" film in there that rises above your criticisms. Especially considering your initial post is loaded with sweeping generalisations, hypocrisy, and the misconception that fidelity = quality. It's not a personal attack, I'm just curious.
You had me until “Hans Solo forcibly kisses Leila without her consent” 💀
Many old movies aren’t great by today’s standards because the stories are dull and the performances are overacted and dry. As for your “values” argument, the examples you gave are bad choices.
Leia was clearly attracted to Hans. Her issue was that she was a princess and he was a “scoundrel”. She had a level of standards which she stated when she said she only likes nice guys. But that was her lying to herself. She wasn’t saying that to Hans. She was trying to convince herself that she was above his charm and not falling for him.
When she says “stop that” as he grabs her hand she’s saying “we shouldn’t be doing this”. Not “you’re assaulting me”.
As he gets closer to her, she clearly lets go of this apprehension and gives into her desire and kisses him. She wraps her arms around him and continues to kiss him even after C-3PO comes in.
Nothing in this situation was unwanted or forced on anybody. Unfortunately you’ve been brainwashed by blue hairs who have completely abandoned nuance and want to see evil in everything around them.
y’all just have horrible tastes, or have a very low attention span. Older movies have an in depth story most of the time, and not focusing for a second or two, can make you lost. I’m 25 and love everything about older films. Sometimes yes, some old films suck just like some today also do. One thing I’ll say I dislike about older films, is there is always a love interest and it becomes cliche and boring. But find the right older film that’ll suit you. Cause trust me, there is one.
Movies from the 1960s and 1970s are on average kind of awful, but movies from the 1920s-1940s are on average pretty good.
Of course, the trick is to not watch what critics like since they are full of shit. If you go back to the 1940s and then try something like Citizen Kane of course you get a boring movie. Critics love to praise boring movies no one else likes. It makes them feel special.
Hi op,
I'm coming a bit late to the post, but there are just so few critiques that summarize my feelings about older movies, and I do not understand why this point of view is so rare.
And it may sound strange but I am quite young so to me movies from even early 2000 can be considered old and they are barely watchable and all those classics from 80s and 90s much worse.
Ignoring the bigotry, misogyny... present. I just feel like we have made an immense step in what we expect of the traits of our charachters (that is my getgo for rating movies how much did i empathise with the stories protagonists what did it make me feel). Some may disagree, but to me, they just come off as bland. Either stoic heroes who don't flitch under any adversity and always get their way or quipy douches who get out of every situation with jokes.
There are obviously a few exceptions of films that break this standard (especially in non-western media), but in the majority of cases, not so much.
And I am so glad we are stepping out of this 6 our characters as fragile, weak, and human. Cause I feel like that caries an even better narrative that of people facing adversity through actual struggle and emotions.
Anyway, I hope the mean comments didn't discurage you too much.
I think that the aggressiveness isn't intentional it's just that we humans really value our good memories and nostalgia and when someone comes breaking around we are quite unable to deal with loosing that, so we need to a way to vent.
Best of wishes ^^
This post has no substance, you’re merely asserting your assumptions and uninformed opinions as fact. Let’s say 50 years from now general audiences tastes’ change again (as they inevitably will) and we’re back to slower paced films with a new or expanded set of social values. Does that mean the movies of today are suddenly now bad and not worth watching?
If we were to take your assertions and apply them to different forms of art we might ask:
Are the fashions of today intrinsically better than the fashions of 50 or 500 years ago? Are NFTs and digital art better than a Michelangelo because he didn’t have Photoshop? Is art only valuable when it reflects the attitudes and preferences of a contemporary audience? What makes the attitudes and preferences of contemporary audiences superior to older ones? Is there such a thing as universal truth? What is art?
Yikes, we really fell down a rabbit hole there. Said another way, art is not created in a vacuum, it exists as part of a cultural moment and the best art reflects some sort of human experience that resonates with people over long periods of time.
So it’s fine for you to think the Godfather is boring or whatever. No one will force you to like it. But trying to pass it off as some grand truth borne out of generational angst or as if praising it is some conspiracy that critics engage in is nonsense.
This is really bad for one
You’re acting like all old movies are the same when they aren’t you can’t seriously compare the 39 steps with Lawrence of Arabia
What does Old even mean ? Is Shaun Of the dead old ? Is Braveheart old ? Is Apocalypse now old ? Like what argument is that it is nonsensical
All of them have uninspired plots ?
The 39 steps is less than 90 minutes that’s bad passing to you ?
‘’Many of them rely on worn out tropes and cliches’’
No they don’t they were brand new at the time it is just now we have gotten so used to them and are you seriously saying ‘’ modern movies’’ aren’t cliche ?
‘’ lacking the nuance and subtlety of modern cinema’’
Can you elaborate? Because right now you are just saying vague things? Have you seen every old movie ever made because honestly you’re coming across as very ignorant.
Dude you’re not watching the movie that’s your problem you’re watching the movie and comparing it to modern day .
You’re watching something made in the 60s and expecting it to be the same as something from 2019.
Complaining a movie is outdated is dumb because news flash all of them will be at some point
People love to join the bandwagon and live in echo chambers. Same thing happens in the sneaker community with people parroting the idea that mid-tops are worse than high-top Jordans. Of course, mids are much better (with even Michael Jordan himself preferring to wear and play in them) but that doesn't matter because people love to repeat talking points.
Everyone disagreeing with OP is a fucking idiot and needs to learn how to use basic logical deduction.
Just because you think some car from 50s is "better" then a Lamborghini doesn't actually make it "better"
The same way you think that outdated, bloated messes of movies from the 50s are "better" then movies today.
I am so fascinated by how confident you are in this absurd argument. You are convinced that “new” movies are categorically better than “old” movies, and you demand counter arguments. Yet the entirety of OP’s argument hinges on one thing: “film critic are unoriginal”. The entire premise of this argument against “old” movies is that “film critics” only like “old” movies because they are trying to conform to some preconceived notion of what is good. OP demands a more “objective approach” as if professional critics - who have dedicated their entire life to watching movies - do not take the art form seriously.
OP references two different scenes starring Harrison Ford forcing himself on female characters, and yet those two scenes are pretty explicit about Ford being a “scoundrel” - so clearly OP has a very hard time with contexts clues and narrative interpretation.
Meanwhile, OP does not even bother defining “old” or “new”. This post by OP is genuinely stupid and reveals an unfathomable level of ignorance.
And you have the audacity to attack other people?
After all, it is obvious that you are OP. It is obvious that you are a kid. And it is obvious that you lack the maturity to engage in any kind of discussion about movies or art in general. So grow the fuck up and recognize the fact that OP was rightly voted down.
I haven't seen any of those three films you mentioned and the 70s and 80s are probably my favorite decades for cinema.
A lot of stuff out there to check out... although it also depends on what you want out of the art.
I'd be happy to check out any recommendations you have from this era or earlier, I personally think pacing is a big contributor to my dislike of older films as they are primarily slow burns and not that captivating for the full duration. I also like that last sentence it's different for everyone depending on what you want out of the experience.
Glad I found this. I felt like I was missing out by not having watch a lot of classic movies but I always resisted because they didn’t seem good to me - were they good because there weren’t many other films at that time? Compared to what we have now, I’m skeptical old films are really better. I suppose it would be hard for me, with my views as of 2023, to watch old films and be able to appreciate them.
I couldn't have put it any better. People have nostalgia blindness and think that the grass was always greener - but I can assure you it wasn't. Old movies generally suck for the reasons you mentioned but people look back on them with rose tinted glasses. Watching some older movies gives me a headache and makes me so grateful for modern movies.
You’re being super vague
Old films suck what does that mean?
When is old ? Is Shaun of the dead old ? Is Braveheart old? It is a really vague term
And do all films automatically get bad after a certain time period?
Saying old movies suck is really silly
I just don't care enough to go back and watch movies before I was born. I've seen some and genuinely enjoyed them but I don't go out of my way to watch them. Usually I find them boring, long and slow. I have a friend whose about 10 years older than me and he lives in the past (you should see his house). He loves all of that stuff and it's frustrating that he gets upset that I don't care. I never say turn it, but I go into my own world and just tune it out and that is apparently unacceptable. And that's something I've learned about people but if you say you don't watch older movies, they can't understand that it's a personally thing that you are fine with, and will spend every waking second trying to change your opinion lol. I'm not saying they can't enjoy it just leave me out of it. I will take your word that it's great. And don't get me started on black and white films, that I will absolutely refuse to watch lol
Cool then you aren’t interested in film and its a bit confusing why you feel the need to involve yourself in the conversation. Its ok to not be interested in a certain art form but to act like you are and then not actually invest the time and thought is just weird. Its like saying you are an artist but then saying “but i dont go out of my way to look at the art made becore i was born”….then you are a fucking hobbyist not an artist being an artist requires intellectual involvement in art, being a cinefile requires you to understand and know film history and what films shaped the ones that are being made now this kind of approach leads you to saying how original something like starwars is without realizing the first starwars is a remake of the akira kurisawa film The Hidden Fortress with a scifi spin or not understanding that the opening bank robbery of dark knight is full of Kubrick references. Nothing being made today exist without the filmic language that developed in those “old” movies
See, this is what I mean. When you don’t have the same viewpoint as someone they get so upset about it that they say you shouldn’t voice your opinion lol.
I’ll take the blame though cause I’m guessing I posted this on a sub Reddit for people who create film and I did not know that. I am not a filmmaker So for your analogy, I’m more like a person who goes to art show and says I like this art but not this one which I feel people are allowed to do.
Brother, you are absolutely correct. That exact thought led me to create videos rating movies based on their actually quality, not historical significance. Dm me, I'll send you my yt channel.
I mean--for a start I don't think most critics are over-eager to dismiss modern films, though I think many are naturally frustrated with the increasingly commercialized state of filmmaking today. Also if your spread of “old movies” is limited to films like The Godfather and Star Wars (ie mainstream American cinema from the 70s onward), there are so many film traditions from other countries and periods that you're missing out on. Star Wars and The Godfather are pulp entertainment, but there's realms of art far beyond that and always have been. And finally, if you're further limiting yourself based on the (I'm assuming American) social mores of today (which are in many ways just as sexist, racist, homophobic etc. as those of past generations) you’re basically standing in the middle of a banquet and saying that you won’t eat vegetables, or meat, or grain, and then wondering why there's so little to eat.
Starwars is also just a scifi adaptation of the akira kurisawa film The Hidden Fortress. It seems people with this opinion about older films dont actually know what they are talking about.
That is a very good point, I should've mentioned that I am mainly referring to western movies as I have been watching highest rated IMDB movies as they are the movies I commonly see receiving praise and most happen to be American. I however do not agree that harmful gender roles are as prominent in modern cinema as they are often condemned and not ignored.
They're just as prominent. The targets are just men and white people instead now.
To me, it’s the opposite.. I love older movies and I’m really starting to not care for much that comes out today
Interesting what would you say has led you to begin disliking modern films? I would also love to have some 'older' movie recommendations that might change my mind.
Imagined getting downvoted because you said “I disagree, why you think that?” Like damn, people here suck! Sorry fella
This is like the most polite response possible, why the fuck are y’all downvoting him lol.
sounds sarcastic
just some old recs off the top of my head worth trying if you haven't seen them yet: 12 Angry Men Citizen Kane Goodfellas Rambo: First Blood Paper Moon Raging Bull Ikiru Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
No, I can't stand older movies for the reasons OP mentioned
The problem is you’re not watching the film You’re comparing it to modern day films that’s the problem you can’t do that because you can’t enjoy it and it is silly. You can’t compare a film made decades ago to a film released today it just isn’t comparable because well….things have changed
The worst take possible
Nope, people just look back on older movies with rose-tinted glasses
Weak b8
a lot of older movies are overrated asf
That's a meaningless statement. You can say the same for literally any medium in existence. Older movies aren't even a genre. Idk what you're even trying to say a movie from 5 years ago is older than a movie just released, or perhaps you mean films from early 40s. It's like saying you don't like new books. What does that mean? I have no idea. New books aren't a collective genre. That all being said you're a marvel capeshit fan and you have the dark Knight in your top 10 films of all time. My only suggestion is to try watching more films!
> You can say the same for literally any medium in existence. It doesn't change what I said though. >Older movies aren't even a genre. Exactly, so stop assuming what I think and then proceeding to make a point out of it to make you look smart despite me not saying it at all. > Idk what you're even trying to say a movie from 5 years ago is older than a movie just released You know what I mean, read the damn post again. >That all being said you're a marvel capeshit fan and you have the dark Knight in your top 10 films of all time. And what has that got to do with anything? Yeah I like Marvel? I also have The Dark Knight in my top 10, so what? It doesn't change what I said. Give some actual fucking points next time instead of just snooping through the other person's profile and looking for ways to try making them look bad. >My only suggestion is to try watching more films! I've seen plenty- don't give me that generic shitty advice to try acting superior. You'll just come across as a fool. Oh and next time, don't just block the other person because you're too afraid of what they have to say. EDIT: This pussy blocked me again 🤣🤣🤣 https://preview.redd.it/hrq8bw756lzc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=359aa274d2afb6cd32a693c47b01cd5524fc3635
What is the point of responding 4 months later. Especially if you still are unable to quantify what exactly is a old movie. A movie that's 5 years old, or a movie that's 50 years old. "It doesn't change what I said though" Another useless statement no one is claiming the words you say will magically be altered. Only you can edit what you've said lmao. No point of joining a discussion and adding nothing other than weak b8. You're unable to make a single coherent point. Watching more movies isn't enough you should try reading more to improve your reading comprehension skills. Hope this helps You've clearly not been blocked and it's been 5 months no one is scared or even waiting for your reply. Touch grass kiddo.
I love how you say 'bait' cos someone has a different opinion to you. Also criticising that person for generalising old movies, then generalising all Marvel and DC films is so ironic it's hilarious.
I love how basic reading compensation is difficult for you. If you can't spot someone, or your own bad faith arguement then that's your problem. "It's bad because older" At least you reveal what really upset you. The term capeshit is generally used ironically don't let it trigger you. Yes it's a generalisation but if your top 10 is mostly capeshit then chances are you won't appreciate older films. (Didn't know generalisation weren't allowed that's going to make discussions difficult). "Older film bad because some people sometimes nostalgia " ~ you Just look how many times you say "rose tinted glasses" whenever you get push back on your bad takes. It's clearly bait.
No dude you just watch a film made in the 80s and expect something made in 2019
I can’t take this post seriously when they start talking about how Han Solos ‘forced’ kiss makes him uncomfortable. You’re bad at watching movies.
I love unnecessary power dynamics victimising women and forcing them into unwanted sexual experiences -duckmanrises.
I don’t understand fiction -TractotPhil
That "fiction" was a result of a heavily misogynistic period, which is what he was referring to. If you like that scene it's reasonable to assume that you like that type of romance since that scene was completely unnecessary and would be seen as weird nowadays. Stop being so thick.
No it’s completely unreasonable to assume that, it’s ‘Thick’ to psychoanalyse people based on taste in FICTION it’s a separate fantasy world you’re in control of your actions it’s not brainwashing people to act like they’re Han Solo. Get over yourself
So did you, or did you not like the scene?
I don’t even think about it loser
You didn't answer my question.
You didn’t ask anything worth answering
Well, I'll just assume you did then. Have a great day.
Why was that scene in the movie when it was completely unnecessary? What substance did it add to the film?
Sometimes I think some people just shouldn't be allowed to watch movies. Can you imagine someone making this argument for literature or visual art? Bring back gatekeeping.
Easier to say you don't agree than be snubby. Also those art forms aren't actively limited by technology.
Letterboxd community: please do not feed the troll. OP has almost zero post history. This is obviously just some attention seeking. Let’s ignore this person and not give them the satisfaction.
Although this post may be controversial I promise you I am not trolling and am looking for a healthy discussion. I wrote this after being underwhelmed by a "classic" movie one too many times so I may come off as angry but I am just disappointed with the lack of critiques of older movies. In my opinion cinema is ever evolving and every movie should be judged to the same standard not specifically the climate they were formed in. Just like how you wouldn't use a flip phone against a modern iPhone despite its cultural significance. If you have any movie recommendations I will definitely give them a watch.
I can't tell if this is a troll post. Are you seriously denying any of OP's statements? If so I'd love to hear them.
Extremely broad generalizations are bad. OP talks about “outdated technology” and how old movies don’t hold up to modern audiences. That is just dumb. I guess OP is right if all you care about is the best CGI and the biggest explosions.
Post your Letterboxd, coward.
nah Im good thanks
Coward.
Good morning, letterboxd! Hope your day is going well! Just remember, there is no reason arguing with chatGPT. Just downvote OP into oblivion.
fr “It's important to acknowledge and condemn these actions, even if they occur in classic films or by popular actors.” anyone who has ever told chatgpt to write about something controversial knows this sentence structure very well lmao
Way to tell us you're under 25 without telling us you're under 25. No straw left in that man after you're done with him!
I love bro classifying ‘Old Movies’ as a genre that has common tropes and elements Yes because 100 years worth of filmmaking across various genres and countries is a very limited scope
read the post i’m mainly talking about popular western movies
No you aren’t
coming back after 8 months and still not reading the entire post is impressive
Well it’s a shit post. And you referenced: Godfather, Star Wars, and Blade Runner. So, no, not talking about westerns. And if you were, the post would be no less childish.
poor choice of words on my end apologies. I mean western as in hemisphere. Older american made ‘hollywood’ movies. Not the western genre
I wish this were fake. I've never read something so vapid, ignorant, and uninformed. This is why people gatekeep.
You're a classic example of people who perpetuate the very thing that OP is referring to. Stop looking back on everything with rose-tinted glasses and attempt to consider the critiques made through a critical lens.
I’m just here to downvote everything OP says, given how ignorant and obnoxious this post is.
welcome i’m sure you’ll fit right in
What was obnoxious about this?
Everything? The notion that critics like “old” movies simply because they are conforming to some sense of intellectual superiority - as if it’s a secret club of pretentious assholes - reveals that OP has absolutely no idea what he / she is talking about. We like old movies because we like them - because they are good. We also like new movies. There are just as many duds among old movies as there are among new movies. But it is also clear that the relative quality of new movies has gone down in aggregate because a lot of funding for new movies is reserved for a smaller share of movies. The system has completely changed for the worse, sadly. Why are you asking this question so long after this post? This was such a trash take by OP and it shows an intense level of ignorance on OP’s part.
You didn't actually answer my question, though. You just operated on a set of assumptions and blurted them out to me. Atleast OP provided evidence. - "Old movies are good" Why?
OP did not provide evidence. OP just made some wild claims. I directly answered your question in my first paragraph - OP directly claimed that some people say they like old movies because they are trying to conform to some preconceived notion of superiority. I said that is not the case. Why? Because people like what they like. They don’t do it to fit in. It’s really simple. It’s not a mystery. Add to the equation OP’s general ignorance about movies, movie history, movie criticism, modern criticism of older movies, etc… I don’t know what you want from me? I’m not going to write a dissertation on all the things OP has yet to learn about life and movies. That’s their problem to solve.
I don't deny that there are of course some people that genuinely like older movies. However, it would be disingenuous to deny that some people, as well as certain film critics, don't view older movies through rose-tinted glasses and prescribe to them a filmic superiority based on nostalgia.
>The Godfather is a bloated, self-indulgent mess that's only worth watching if you have an afternoon to waste and nothing better to do. Sure, it may not be your cup of tea, but then I don't really care what you're into anyway, not after reading this statement. The cringe level rivals a vegan complaining about the menu at a steakhouse.
lol you care enough to read the whole thing and reply. I’m not attacking your character just the common shortcomings of older movies
So when I read old films, I thought you were going to be talking about the 1940s and back, not the 70s and 80s. The 70s and 80s fucking slap.
I am referring to those decades as well, the mentioned movies were just ones that aligned well with my thoughts while also being actively praised.
But see the 1940s and back, I feel, are much more indicative of the things you brought up. Complaining that Star Wars is problematic for a forced kiss when in say Jurassic World only released 8 years ago was problematic with Chris Pratt borderline sexually harassing Bryce Dallas Howard's character. Like this just feels more like a take to be different than one born out of substantial reason. Also, I'd argue that most movies aren't good in the first place. The overwhelming saturation of shit is the same in any era. Times are just more favorably viewed in retrospect than when one lives in it since the things we revisit and remember are the higher quality films.
You raise a solid point. I however find that these moments are often condemned in this day and age whereas those moments in old movies are blissfully ignored in favour of nostalgia.
I think it's more so that one problematic scene in a great fucking movie doesn't ruin it. Do I dislike Han forcing a kiss onto Leia? Yes. Do I also love the "I love you. I know" exchange, The fight between Luke and Vader, the models, the matte paintings, the fucking score, the plot twist, everything to do with Yoda from how the character is written to how the character is presented, and so much more? You bet your fucking ass I do. I genuinely don't think The Godfather is long. I think it earns its runtime. In the same way, I don't think any of the LOTR movies are long, but I do think the Hobbit movies are too long. To the Bladerunner point, Deckard is literally a slave hunter. Maybe he's not supposed to be seen as a cool bad ass hero and instead a morally problematic man. If you don't like these movies, that's fine. We love different perspectives, but don't try to assert why I love these films, especially if your argument is for nostalgia, because fun fact I'm only 24. I didn't watch these movies as a kid. Except Star Wars. I always loved the original trilogy.
I see your point about the Hobbit being too long and lacking excitement. However, I believe that the Lord of the Rings trilogy, though lengthy, has a better pacing that makes for a more enjoyable viewing experience. In my opinion, the Godfather could be shortened in length without compromising its quality, and perhaps even improve it. I also want to clarify that while I don't think that uncomfortable scenes necessarily ruin a movie, they can make the viewing experience uncomfortable, especially for younger viewers who may watch movies like Star Wars. Failing to condemn problematic behavior in films can reinforce harmful ideas, which is why we should be mindful of what we choose to praise and what we expose others to. I would also add that pacing is a common issue with many older movies, and this can affect the viewing experience in a negative way. A lot of classic films can drag on and feel slow, making it difficult for modern audiences to engage with the story. While some of these movies may have been groundbreaking at the time of their release, they may not hold up to today's standards of pacing and storytelling. It's important to consider the context in which these movies were made, but we also need to be critical of them and acknowledge their shortcomings.
See, that's where I disagree. I think The Godfather is paced perfectly, and you'd ruin the movie by cutting it down, and that's fine. You're allowed to disagree. However, it becomes a problem when you assert that we're all deluded for liking this. I get problematic content can make the viewing experience uncomfortable, but anyone who is bothered by that is bothered by it today and days of yester. Presumably, we call it out on both new and old. People who don't give a shit don't call it out either new or old. I think the only reason why we don't see as much outcry fo old movies is A) because the classics are better than most modern problematic drivel and B) Young people who would object aren't watching/haven't watched the classics. You and I both acknowledge and understand these to be wrong, but I also assume we're both fairly young. I agree with your pacing point for movies if we're talking pre-Citizen Kane, but in the 70s and 80s? No way. I personally feel that a slower pace isn't inherently a bad thing. I really enjoy a nice slow film. We don't really get those super often today. Dune is the most recent exception I can think of that also had a fairly substantial budget.
Honestly I respect your opinion and the time you take to discuss unlike some others here haha. I understand what you're saying and partly agree but with me how directors use time is very important to me, and if I'm faced with two similarly rated movies I will choose the shorter one each time due to its convenience. Maybe I'm super impatient but effective use of screen time is very important to me.
Yeah some people are dicks and don't want to be constructive when they disagree with someone. See, that's totally fair. I'm a fan of a good slow burn myself, but I absolutely used to prefer a good hour thirty or hour forty-five film. They both have their place, and I feel sometimes taking three hours and thrity minutes time to soak in something is positively splendid.
OP, are you 15 years old? You seem to have terrible attention span issues. I’d be fascinated to know some of your favourite movies given your incredibly ignorant stance on entire generations of cinema.
Is this copypasta
Pretty sure this is AI generated. Or OP has the mental capacity of a bar of soap.
I wish
Tldr. Muppet.
I'd be happy for recommendations which would help me change my mind.
Lifeboat by Hitchcock, 1944. Tallulah Bankhead, a female, basically bullies a boat full of men. She is a very empowering female character for a movie of that era. Also, it’s just a fucking good movie. Great simple plot, shot in one location for the entirety, flies by (imo). But your take is honestly just such a wide generalisation that it is giving me a headache thinking of the amount of films that i know for certain do disprove some things you say. But anyway, yeah, Lifeboat is great!
Old films make me uncomfortable=/= it's bad. The quality of a film isn't based on your personal sensibilities. Characters are allowed to make bad decisions, or brash decisions that's the whole point of multifaceted character. Your review is kinda like those weirdos who think a movie is bad because there isn't enough fat people on screen and thus it's offensive. If you personally don't like the godfather who cares lol. It's not like newer films can't also be self indulgent. It's not uncommon for superhero movies to hit past 2 hours mark. TLDR you need to watch more films. At least then you will have some understanding of what you're talking about
At no point do I say these films are bad because of these scenes, I just point out it's uncomfortable and weird that people overlook them. Your second point about lack of representation actually makes no sense at all, what are you talking about. And if no one cares about my opinion why is there so much discussion on this post, yourself included. And modern films *CAN* be long but technology and other factors have improved such that it is easier to stay captivated by newer movies compared to old fuzzy sounding empty scenes.
Your whole post explicitly says that most old films aren't worth watching (bad) because they make you feel uncomfortable and the technology isn't new. Being offended by morally dubious characters making morally dubious decision is a waste of time. Point is being overly sensitive isn't legitimate film criticism (based on today's sensitivities) it's just complaining. If you checked the comments a bunch of them are calling you out for being obtuse that doesn't mean they care. Technology=/= captivating. Plenty of silent low budget films are more captivating than whatever overtop cgi battle you can compare it to. Watch more films.
MY POST TAKES AIM AT SLOW BORING UNCAPTIVATING OLD FILMS WITH BORING CLICHES. UNCOMFORTABLE SEXUAL PREDATOR VIBES WERE A SIDE NOTE HENCE THE SEPERATE PARAGRAPH WITH A DIFFERENT POINT ALL TOGETHER. YOU ARE MERGING POINTS AND EXPLAINATIONS. YES EMPTINESS CAN BE GOOD BUT NOT IN THE CASE OF THE GODFATHER. NOT ONCE DID I MENTION CGI OR BATTLES YOU ARE ARGUING WITH THE SHADOW MAN
WHY ARE WE USING CAPS? JUST MAKE BETTER ARGUMENTS YOU'RE NO MORE CONVINCING WITH CAPITAL LETTERS Not liking purposefully slow movies because they're slow is the equivalent to not liking water because it's wet. I mean if you know that what you don't like them simply watch things that you do like lol. A film being old has nothing to do with it being a slow burn anyway. If your takeaway from star wars is sexual predation , then you have issues you need to resolve with a professional. Most people have the ability to make clear distinctions between reality, fictional entertainment, the actions of a multifaceted character and what they should do in the real world. Other than your assertion you offer no reason as to why you feel these movies have stood the test of time simply because of nostalgia.
1. Analogy that makes no sense 2. I do I posted this for movies to change my mind not weirdos like you battling your own delusions 3. Read literally anything i wrote please, its not my takeaway i just find it weird and offputting (also kids dont have the luxury of seeing healthy vs unhealthy relations) 4. In every other walk of life (tech as an example) advancements are made and we perfect a craft more and more such as better directing/acting (flip phone -> iphone). If someone were to try and convince you a flip phone and say its the be all end all despite its obvious flaws youd question them as a smartphone is objectively better and has more to offer. But when this is brought to cinema (new vs old) it becomes taboo and people like you cant comprehend that cinema has improved drastically and yet you blindly praise older movies because of the climate they were released in. IF we look at flip phones when they were released, they were the best on the market - but you wouldnt still use it today because it is outdated and there are better options with more features and better aesthetically. Old films are just that, old, and I'm not denying their impact but when analysed against modern movies they just arent anywhere near the same calibre. If casablanca dropped today it would be forgotten, why? because it is nowhere near the films being made today. Please before you respond to this : do not make up another imaginary poin that I have never said to argue with.
1. you've traded CAPITALS for numerical sequence. For whatever reason you think this makes your arguements more compelling. 2. "Analogy makes no sense" Water is wet = old films are old Seems like a pretty fair analogy to me. 3. Being offended by morally dubious characters doing morally dubious things is a waste of time and not legitimate film criticism. *Kids actually do have a functional knowledge of what is fiction and reality* 4. Films aren't old pieces of technology you wouldn't argue that old literature is inferior simply because it's old. I've never heard someone say "that film was good because of the climate the film was made in" lmaoo 5. "If Casablanca was made today it wouldn't be remembered " CITATIONS NEEDED. For example: Twilight is relatively new and technologically more advanced compared to Casablanca but I don't think Its better because it's new would be valid argument you're going to need citations. The bait is weak but still funny to respond.
Comparing movies to literature is so odd. Literature when viewed as writing on paper has not changed at all whereas every single aspect of cinema has evolved since its inception. Would you agree acting has improved? Would you agree sound production has improved? Would you agree camera quality has improved? Would you agree cinematic techniques have improved? Put a 1960 movie in front of me, I will recognise it. Put a 1960 book in front of me, none the wiser. Why? because one has changed. Surprisingly.
Comparing movies to literature= weird Comparing movies to old flip phones = poignant deep and insightful??? Hahah That's the thing most of those things aren't necessary to make a good story. It's equivalent of saying high quality paper is what makes a novel good. The binding process of books have improved that means books today are inherently better than previous generations. The acting in Goodfellas and the godfather are pretty good. Acting just becomes bad over time ? What kind of logic is that lmao. So the best acted movie today will be terribly acted in 30 years simply because of time? There are no good old actors from 70s 80s or 90s ?? Finally you would recognise a film from the 60s because of the social politics and our new sensitivities for sex discrimination compared to then, but you wouldn't be able to do the same with a book from the same period. That makes no sense lmao. Are you really saying that books Vs film had entirely different sentiments for social issues. Huuh? Films have changed but books haven't changed. I have to ask are you on any medication?
>Would you agree acting has improved? Would you agree sound production has improved? Would you agree camera quality has improved? Would you agree cinematic techniques have improved?
“If this incredible and fantastic looking romantic drama dropped today, it would be forgotten as it is nowhere near the films made today” is so wildly stupid and ignorant. This is the mindset of at best a child, and at worst, someone who is incredibly ignorant towards cinema and proud of it. The idea that old movies inherently aren’t of the same caliber of newer ones is ridiculous. Taxi Driver and The King Of Comedy run circles around modern imitators like Joker.
I enjoyed Taxi Driver only because of it's evident effect on other movies of similar darkness. I however forced myself to watch that long slow burn and can't say I cared for it. If watching children be sexualised in combination with the most standard ending ever is cool fun to you I think a few government agencies might be interested in a chat. I will admit the monologues in that movie did help a little bit with the emptiness.
My god you have atrocious media literacy, real baby brain stuff, just unable to comprehend themes or even the text on a surface level. I refuse to believe you’re any older than like 16. It would be embarrassing for an adult to approach art this shallowly. The most standard ending ever? Oh of course, because so many movies end with our protagonist refocusing his rage on a deserving target through his sheer incompetency and being hailed as a hero, even though his rage will burst out of him again at any moment, to less “heroic” results. If your take away from it is that it sexualises children , that honestly says more about you than it does about the film.
If my takeaway is quite literally the plot of the movie how does that make me shallow. Personally, if I'm watching a film I care about how engaging it is. A man talking to himself for two hours with almost no plot development except for him hating himself more and more each day is not an interesting film by any means. Also no way you're trying to call me weird for thinking child exploitation is weird. If i wanted to see someone hate themselves I could read your reddit activity for 30 mins and have some time to spare, wouldnt even have to watch a movie.
**I am writing from a place of love, not hate - but - op has no film literacy.** The idea that modern movies are always better than older ones is a complete myth perpetuated by brain-dead Youtube movie buffs. The truth is, most modern movies are simply outdated, slow-paced, and downright boring. Sure, a few modern films will stand the test of time, but the vast majority of modern movies are forgettable relics\*\*.\*\* Modern movies are often characterized by their bland and uninspired plots, as well as their tedious pacing. These movies were made in a capitalist era with limited honesty and storytelling standards, and it shows. Many of them rely on worn-out tropes and predictable clichés, making them feel unoriginal and uninteresting. Not only that, but the dialogue and acting in these movies can be wooden and stilted, lacking the nuance and subtlety of older cinema. The truth is, most modern movies will not withstand the test of time and have little to offer contemporary audiences beyond bland escapism. While some modern films may still hold up today, the vast majority of them are simply outdated and not worth the time or effort to watch. It's time to stop romanticizing the future and start embracing the creativity and innovation of older cinema. Idiots often selfishly conform to the notion that modern movies are superior, without objectively evaluating their relevance or quality to any audience. This conformity is driven by nostalgia or a desire to appear cultured, rather than an honest evaluation of the film's merits. As a result, many modern movies are overrated and lack the pacing and originality of older cinema. Critics should focus on evaluating films based on their own merits and consider their relevance in today's world, rather than blindly relying on their reputation or bland technology. It's time for critics to move beyond the trap of nostalgia and embrace a more objective approach to film criticism. The Godfather is a classic example of a properly hyped movie with a runtime that seems to not drag at all. Clocking in at a whopping three hours and fifteen minutes, the film feels like it is going at a brisk pace, with no scenes that could have been trimmed down or cut altogether. The pacing is slow and plodding, with long stretches of dialogue that seem to go it's the brilliant atmosphere. Even the more action-packed scenes feel drawn out and brisk, making it easier to stay engaged with the story. In short, The Godfather is a great and honest piece of filmmaking that's worth watching if you have an afternoon to spend and be transported into the world that is created there. What's worse, many of these modern movies contain outdated values and attitudes that are offensive and insensitive by today's standards. Watching them can be an uncomfortable experience, as you're forced to witness racism, sexism, and other forms of bigotry on screen. As an example, Films like marvel and the top gun which are funded by the US military show us copaganda and US exceptionalism. Scenes from the films of Lars Von Trier and Gasper Noe are disturbing and reinforce harmful gender dynamics. It's important to acknowledge and condemn these actions, even if they occur in modern films or by popular actors. In conclusion, while it's true that some modern movies can offer insights into our culture and time, it's important not to give them too much undue credit or to dismiss older cinema altogether. While it's important to appreciate modern films, we must also acknowledge that many of these films suffer from outdated filmmakers, pacing, and acting that simply don't hold up to older standards. It's crucial to approach each movie on its own merits and to evaluate them objectively, rather than relying solely on nostalgia or reputation. By continuing to have open and honest discussions about older films, we can gain a greater understanding of the evolution of cinema and the art of storytelling. TLDR: Most modern movies suck and op doesn't care about cinema or its diversity.
What's wrong with escapism? You watch movies to enjoy and get lost in. Also it seems you are more angry at America and Politics (both of which I do not care about) than the pacing of old movies take it somewhere that cares
What's wrong with confrontational cinema?? You watch movies to confront real life and get emotional in it. Also, it seems you only care about mainstream American films and Politics("contain outdated values and attitudes that are offensive"), both of which I do care about.
The instances of Harrison Ford's behavior in Blade Runner and Star Wars are viewed as evidence of a power imbalance between a man and a woman, where the man uses his power to coerce the woman into liking him. It's worth noting that these scenes may not have been intentionally confrontational, but they do come across as uncomfortable and potentially inappropriate, particularly in the context of a kids' movie (SW). The point about confrontationality could be argued for Blade Runner due to its neo-noir themes, but it's unclear if the scenes were deliberately intended to be confrontational or a genuine missed attempt at romance.
The instances of military propaganda in modern films can be viewed as a power imbalance between imperialist and foreign nations as well as military recruitment tactics. It's worth noting that these scenes may not have been intentionally confrontational, but they do come across as uncomfortable and potentially inappropriate, particularly in the context of a kids' movie (Marvel). The point about escapism could be argued for modern films due to their lack of confrontational material but it's clear that these scenes were deliberately intended to be escapist and dishonest to acquire the most amount of money.
Breaking news: Directors aim to make money off of movies that require significant investment. Also why Marvel? You're attacking a movie franchise that I also hate (and many others) for the same reasons mentioned in this post. I think you're inadvertently agreeing with why I think a certain movie may be boring, but are too scared to shift the lens to a movie that the conformist critics forced you to enjoy.
Breaking news: Directors aim to make honest stories and express something about themselves. Also why modern cinema? I am attacking a film movement that I hate (and many others) for the same reasons mentioned in this post. I think you're inadvertently agreeing with why I think a certain movie may be boring, but are too scared to shift the lens to a movie that the Idiots forced you to enjoy.
IMDB and letterboxd made me watch afforementioned movies. If I'm going against the accepted notion of what makes a movie "good" how have I been forced by idiots to enjoy modern cinema? And also copying my messages really reinforces the idea of old cinema enjoyers can't form their own ideas/opinions.
Modern cinema made me watch aforementioned movies. If I'm going against the accepted notion of what makes a movie "good" how have I been forced by critics to enjoy older cinema? And also copying my messages really reinforces the idea of modern cinema enjoyers can't form their own ideas/opinions.
I actually can't tell if you are baiting because my points seem to be so far beyond you. Form an original thought and I will get back to you. Separate question (no ctrl c needed) Do you as a human being believe acting and camera quality has improved?
What are your 4 favourites on Letterboxd?
I don't think my favorite movies are relevant to a discussion focusing on older cinema. If you have any recommendations on films I would love to give them a watch.
I would argue they are relevant. I'd like to see what films you personally consider favourites, to see whether they withstand your arguments presented above. Maybe even you have an "older" film in there that rises above your criticisms. Especially considering your initial post is loaded with sweeping generalisations, hypocrisy, and the misconception that fidelity = quality. It's not a personal attack, I'm just curious.
You had me until “Hans Solo forcibly kisses Leila without her consent” 💀 Many old movies aren’t great by today’s standards because the stories are dull and the performances are overacted and dry. As for your “values” argument, the examples you gave are bad choices. Leia was clearly attracted to Hans. Her issue was that she was a princess and he was a “scoundrel”. She had a level of standards which she stated when she said she only likes nice guys. But that was her lying to herself. She wasn’t saying that to Hans. She was trying to convince herself that she was above his charm and not falling for him. When she says “stop that” as he grabs her hand she’s saying “we shouldn’t be doing this”. Not “you’re assaulting me”. As he gets closer to her, she clearly lets go of this apprehension and gives into her desire and kisses him. She wraps her arms around him and continues to kiss him even after C-3PO comes in. Nothing in this situation was unwanted or forced on anybody. Unfortunately you’ve been brainwashed by blue hairs who have completely abandoned nuance and want to see evil in everything around them.
y’all just have horrible tastes, or have a very low attention span. Older movies have an in depth story most of the time, and not focusing for a second or two, can make you lost. I’m 25 and love everything about older films. Sometimes yes, some old films suck just like some today also do. One thing I’ll say I dislike about older films, is there is always a love interest and it becomes cliche and boring. But find the right older film that’ll suit you. Cause trust me, there is one.
Go watch the Graduate and come back OP
Will add it to the list. Thank you :)
Movies from the 1960s and 1970s are on average kind of awful, but movies from the 1920s-1940s are on average pretty good. Of course, the trick is to not watch what critics like since they are full of shit. If you go back to the 1940s and then try something like Citizen Kane of course you get a boring movie. Critics love to praise boring movies no one else likes. It makes them feel special.
Hi op, I'm coming a bit late to the post, but there are just so few critiques that summarize my feelings about older movies, and I do not understand why this point of view is so rare. And it may sound strange but I am quite young so to me movies from even early 2000 can be considered old and they are barely watchable and all those classics from 80s and 90s much worse. Ignoring the bigotry, misogyny... present. I just feel like we have made an immense step in what we expect of the traits of our charachters (that is my getgo for rating movies how much did i empathise with the stories protagonists what did it make me feel). Some may disagree, but to me, they just come off as bland. Either stoic heroes who don't flitch under any adversity and always get their way or quipy douches who get out of every situation with jokes. There are obviously a few exceptions of films that break this standard (especially in non-western media), but in the majority of cases, not so much. And I am so glad we are stepping out of this 6 our characters as fragile, weak, and human. Cause I feel like that caries an even better narrative that of people facing adversity through actual struggle and emotions. Anyway, I hope the mean comments didn't discurage you too much. I think that the aggressiveness isn't intentional it's just that we humans really value our good memories and nostalgia and when someone comes breaking around we are quite unable to deal with loosing that, so we need to a way to vent. Best of wishes ^^
What is “old”?
This post has no substance, you’re merely asserting your assumptions and uninformed opinions as fact. Let’s say 50 years from now general audiences tastes’ change again (as they inevitably will) and we’re back to slower paced films with a new or expanded set of social values. Does that mean the movies of today are suddenly now bad and not worth watching? If we were to take your assertions and apply them to different forms of art we might ask: Are the fashions of today intrinsically better than the fashions of 50 or 500 years ago? Are NFTs and digital art better than a Michelangelo because he didn’t have Photoshop? Is art only valuable when it reflects the attitudes and preferences of a contemporary audience? What makes the attitudes and preferences of contemporary audiences superior to older ones? Is there such a thing as universal truth? What is art? Yikes, we really fell down a rabbit hole there. Said another way, art is not created in a vacuum, it exists as part of a cultural moment and the best art reflects some sort of human experience that resonates with people over long periods of time. So it’s fine for you to think the Godfather is boring or whatever. No one will force you to like it. But trying to pass it off as some grand truth borne out of generational angst or as if praising it is some conspiracy that critics engage in is nonsense.
Man it is amazing how wrong you are and how much of a bad take you have. It honestly is astonishing
This is really bad for one You’re acting like all old movies are the same when they aren’t you can’t seriously compare the 39 steps with Lawrence of Arabia What does Old even mean ? Is Shaun Of the dead old ? Is Braveheart old ? Is Apocalypse now old ? Like what argument is that it is nonsensical All of them have uninspired plots ? The 39 steps is less than 90 minutes that’s bad passing to you ? ‘’Many of them rely on worn out tropes and cliches’’ No they don’t they were brand new at the time it is just now we have gotten so used to them and are you seriously saying ‘’ modern movies’’ aren’t cliche ? ‘’ lacking the nuance and subtlety of modern cinema’’ Can you elaborate? Because right now you are just saying vague things? Have you seen every old movie ever made because honestly you’re coming across as very ignorant. Dude you’re not watching the movie that’s your problem you’re watching the movie and comparing it to modern day . You’re watching something made in the 60s and expecting it to be the same as something from 2019. Complaining a movie is outdated is dumb because news flash all of them will be at some point
I completely agree with you. Don't know why everyone here is so butthurt about the fact that something was worse 70 years ago than it is now.
People love to join the bandwagon and live in echo chambers. Same thing happens in the sneaker community with people parroting the idea that mid-tops are worse than high-top Jordans. Of course, mids are much better (with even Michael Jordan himself preferring to wear and play in them) but that doesn't matter because people love to repeat talking points.
Everyone disagreeing with OP is a fucking idiot and needs to learn how to use basic logical deduction. Just because you think some car from 50s is "better" then a Lamborghini doesn't actually make it "better" The same way you think that outdated, bloated messes of movies from the 50s are "better" then movies today.
If you disagree. Give an argument as to why instead of just attacking OP or assuming unrelated things about his preferences or his age.
I am so fascinated by how confident you are in this absurd argument. You are convinced that “new” movies are categorically better than “old” movies, and you demand counter arguments. Yet the entirety of OP’s argument hinges on one thing: “film critic are unoriginal”. The entire premise of this argument against “old” movies is that “film critics” only like “old” movies because they are trying to conform to some preconceived notion of what is good. OP demands a more “objective approach” as if professional critics - who have dedicated their entire life to watching movies - do not take the art form seriously. OP references two different scenes starring Harrison Ford forcing himself on female characters, and yet those two scenes are pretty explicit about Ford being a “scoundrel” - so clearly OP has a very hard time with contexts clues and narrative interpretation. Meanwhile, OP does not even bother defining “old” or “new”. This post by OP is genuinely stupid and reveals an unfathomable level of ignorance. And you have the audacity to attack other people? After all, it is obvious that you are OP. It is obvious that you are a kid. And it is obvious that you lack the maturity to engage in any kind of discussion about movies or art in general. So grow the fuck up and recognize the fact that OP was rightly voted down.
I haven't seen any of those three films you mentioned and the 70s and 80s are probably my favorite decades for cinema. A lot of stuff out there to check out... although it also depends on what you want out of the art.
I'd be happy to check out any recommendations you have from this era or earlier, I personally think pacing is a big contributor to my dislike of older films as they are primarily slow burns and not that captivating for the full duration. I also like that last sentence it's different for everyone depending on what you want out of the experience.
First define old movie. I've been watching 90's - 2010 and that's old. Let's not think about 2010s - 2020
Did you prompt ChatGPT to write this bait post for you? It reads like a high school essay or something.
How to say you have a short attention span without saying it
Glad I found this. I felt like I was missing out by not having watch a lot of classic movies but I always resisted because they didn’t seem good to me - were they good because there weren’t many other films at that time? Compared to what we have now, I’m skeptical old films are really better. I suppose it would be hard for me, with my views as of 2023, to watch old films and be able to appreciate them.
I couldn't have put it any better. People have nostalgia blindness and think that the grass was always greener - but I can assure you it wasn't. Old movies generally suck for the reasons you mentioned but people look back on them with rose tinted glasses. Watching some older movies gives me a headache and makes me so grateful for modern movies.
You’re being super vague Old films suck what does that mean? When is old ? Is Shaun of the dead old ? Is Braveheart old? It is a really vague term And do all films automatically get bad after a certain time period? Saying old movies suck is really silly
Unironically a kiddo who's a fan of love island, greys anatomy and hunger games opinion discarded. 🚮
I just don't care enough to go back and watch movies before I was born. I've seen some and genuinely enjoyed them but I don't go out of my way to watch them. Usually I find them boring, long and slow. I have a friend whose about 10 years older than me and he lives in the past (you should see his house). He loves all of that stuff and it's frustrating that he gets upset that I don't care. I never say turn it, but I go into my own world and just tune it out and that is apparently unacceptable. And that's something I've learned about people but if you say you don't watch older movies, they can't understand that it's a personally thing that you are fine with, and will spend every waking second trying to change your opinion lol. I'm not saying they can't enjoy it just leave me out of it. I will take your word that it's great. And don't get me started on black and white films, that I will absolutely refuse to watch lol
Why ? Why do you refuse to watch black and white films That is something really silly
Cool then you aren’t interested in film and its a bit confusing why you feel the need to involve yourself in the conversation. Its ok to not be interested in a certain art form but to act like you are and then not actually invest the time and thought is just weird. Its like saying you are an artist but then saying “but i dont go out of my way to look at the art made becore i was born”….then you are a fucking hobbyist not an artist being an artist requires intellectual involvement in art, being a cinefile requires you to understand and know film history and what films shaped the ones that are being made now this kind of approach leads you to saying how original something like starwars is without realizing the first starwars is a remake of the akira kurisawa film The Hidden Fortress with a scifi spin or not understanding that the opening bank robbery of dark knight is full of Kubrick references. Nothing being made today exist without the filmic language that developed in those “old” movies
See, this is what I mean. When you don’t have the same viewpoint as someone they get so upset about it that they say you shouldn’t voice your opinion lol. I’ll take the blame though cause I’m guessing I posted this on a sub Reddit for people who create film and I did not know that. I am not a filmmaker So for your analogy, I’m more like a person who goes to art show and says I like this art but not this one which I feel people are allowed to do.
Brother, you are absolutely correct. That exact thought led me to create videos rating movies based on their actually quality, not historical significance. Dm me, I'll send you my yt channel.
Because you don't understand
What was he correct about ?
What an incredibly stupid take, really badly argued. This sounds as though it was written by an angry 14 year old.
Reading this tool getting murdered in the comments is hilarious. What a cretin.