am I the only one that doesn't mind when a movie is "dated"?

May 7, 2019 17:50:29 GMT lowtacks86 said:

On some movies, that term definetly applies. The 90s was when Hollywood really started ramping up CGI in their movies but the technology was still kind of new, and now a lot of them definetly look what we would call "dated" (The Phantom Menace comes to mind)

Actually, "Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace" didn't look completely bad, in my eyes. I watched it in theaters so got the full experience. CGI advanced far further within five or so years of course. But if you compare the Darth Maul vs Qui-Gon Jinn light saber fight with the Ben Kenobi vs Darth Vader fight in "Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope", they're almost night and day. Choreography came a long way between both of those movies. In fairness, the CGI was expected in 1999, and far, far impressive in 1977.

And I'm not bashing your statement, lowtacks86 sir. I completely agree with your statement about CGI coming into the '90s and movies looking "dated". I myself don't use that word, I just say the movie looks like it's from the '90s, '70s, '40s etc.

My only point is that there's far more movies that look old, bad, CGI-wise from the '90s. For a few random examples: "The Lawnmower Man", "Death Becomes Her" and "Starship Troopers". Movies I still love for different reasons, but they certainly look more and more like their from the '90s as time goes by. Even scenes in favorite movies of mine like, "Terminator 2: Judgment Day" and "Independence Day" are looking '90s-ish. But I don't care how old or "dated" a movie looks, I'm going to like movies I like.

mikef6 I completely agree with. The day an "Avengers" movie is classified as "dated", that'll be a funny day ha. If anyone tells you a movie from the '30s, '40s, '50s and '60s is too old, shame on them.