|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Nov 21, 2018 18:29:03 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 21, 2018 18:45:29 GMT
... I find it arrogant when people criticize movies for this, as if the stuff they're into will always be timeless. maybe a personal quirk but, for me, movies, in general,ARE timeless ! I do not understand this whole "dated" concept or what it means.
"Over-rated" is another popular phraseology that leave me wondering what they are talking about. How does many people liking a movie very much mean that it is a bad movie ? "Critques" that merely say "meh" as an opinion.. WHAT is that ? oops … wandering off the "dated" track …  I don't like the term overrated either, because it sounds arrogant. There seems to be two ways of using the term. 1. the majority are idiots and my opinion is superior 2. just a quick way to say you don't think a movie is anywhere near as good as the majority I use meh sometimes. It means average/mediocre. |
|
|
|
Post by alpha128 on Nov 21, 2018 18:52:44 GMT
If it has teletype or a telegraph I'm all in. I love seeing the old cars and old technology in film. I go to a science fiction marathon every year that prides itself at showing movies from every decade. One year they showed Destination Moon (1950). During the film a character says something like, "Now we're going to determine our trajectory", and the film cuts to a room full of gears mounted inside wooden boxes, all spinning wildly. "What is that? What the hell is that?" we shouted. Then somebody else shouted back, "It's a computer!" |
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Nov 21, 2018 20:34:31 GMT
Not really.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2018 21:26:39 GMT
It depends who says it's dated. If it's dated for you then of course it'll be difficult to watch. If it's dated because someone else says it's dated then what does that really do for you? Seriously, if a movie is dated by somebody else' standards, what does that actually mean for your viewing habits? Just peer pressure?
When I'm watching something, my instincts and senses react together. I'll know if something makes me comfortable, or if I find it dated and it's no one else' business but my opinion. Edward Norton himself thinks Fight Club would never get made today. I like Edward Norton and I love Fight Club, but holy shit the arrogance! Has he seen some of the stuff that gets made today? It's not all MCU's and Star Wars' and Fantastic Beasts'.
I don't reject "dated" as a criticism or an observation, but it's a criticism/observation I would only on dispense my own terms. And it could mean so many things. In Double Indemnity, the Californian hillside mansion they were living in cost 40,000 dollars if you could ever afford it. Fast forward to 2018 and that money would buy you three ostrich leather bomber jackets. Dated movie? You'll just have to watch and find out for yourself if the movie works beyond the outdated information its era considers normal.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingkoopa on Nov 21, 2018 21:55:12 GMT
Not really. Only exception I can think of is late 90's CGI (something like the devil in "Spawn" comes to mind). And that's only because Rob Bottin and Stan Winston, to name a few, were creatively doing more with less with rubber and latex, than that weird time in the 90's when CD-ROM games/Interactive Movies were having their day in the sun.
Modern CGI doesn't bother me when done well. Not a die-hard MCU fan, for example, but some of the digital effects are convincing on a level that doesn't take you out of the viewing experience. Contrary to something like the morphing effect on Jim Carrey's Riddler in "Batman Forever." Morphing in general was really ugly, and for some reason in vogue, for an uncomfortably long time.
I love when a movie, like "Commando" or "E.T." is a sort of time-capsule of the era in which it was made in/set.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Nov 22, 2018 4:50:19 GMT
Not usually in the case of movies made from the 60s onwards. In fact, it's often part of their charm. Earlier stuff (especially films from pre-1950) is less to my taste.
|
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Nov 22, 2018 6:55:10 GMT
I think it sort of depends... like some peoples idea of 'dated' might be a bit different than mine as I don't mind something being pre-cell phone/internet etc even though I suspect some might call, or refer to that, as dated (you can see vegalyra and others pretty much hinted at this in his post, but that does not bother me). but I generally view the term 'dated' as movies made prior to the 1960's are a general guideline mostly because I feel that's pretty much the point movies are simply TOO different from more modern standards and it makes it harder to enjoy them because of it as I can't quite say exactly what it is but their overall style etc is too different. like maybe lacks connection to them on a emotional level because I think in general movies ultimately boil down to some sort of feeling/emotional response a movie gives the viewer that determines whether it's solid or not at the end of the day. because I have seen enough movies to generally know that avoiding movies made prior to the 1960's is a good guideline for me because they are far less likely to output anything of any real worth. but I guess in some ways... some movies you can tell might not be as well made as others (so they might be dated on some level) but still are enjoyable enough to re-watch once in a while. because like I always say a movie is ultimately made or broke based on whether it's a movie that people want to re-watch from time-to-time as the years pass or not. I feel pretty strongly about that core opinion on movies as it separates the gems from those 'just another movie' types of movies. because I never understood that mindset of some people who watch a movie once or so and praise it, or semi-praise it, only to quickly forget about it and move onto the next movie and pretty much never re-watch it again as that to me speaks volumes that the movie is ultimately nothing special. kolchak92Put it this way... I am confident that there will be a higher volume of movies over the last 30-40 years or so that will be more timeless than movies from way back (say prior to the 1960's or so) as I think movies as a whole are just all around better made and pack more emotional punch/feeling etc in the last 30-40 years or so (say roughly from the 1970's or 1980's to date) than they were in the old days (say pre-1960's or so). sure, I am sure there are some timeless movies pre-1960's but they surely have to be much more limited than post-1960's for sure. but with that said... I think as a rough guideline that the masses in general seem to mostly stick to recent-ish movies (NOTE: if I had to estimate 'recent-ish', lets say roughly the last 20-30 years). so if that's true, that would mean a good portion of what's considered solid say over the last 30 years or so today might be a bit less so in another 30-40 years from now etc. still, even taking that into account... I would still imagine there will be a higher volume of movies that stick with people made from say roughly the 1970's or 1980's til today vs all prior decades combined as I sort of see the 1960's as the early days of good movies although I would estimate that it was more of the 1970's and 1980's before we started to see movies a bit more like today in general. p.s. I am not saying all movies I personally like a lot are timeless with the masses in general as I completely acknowledge they are not. but I think you get the gist of what I am saying above as I would be surprised if I was wrong with the masses as a whole. BATouttaheckIll say this... just because a person feels a movie is overrated does not automatically mean they think it's a bad movie. basically I see overrated like this as a general rule... Movie A gets praise by either critiques and/or general people but a random viewer sees the movie and simply feels the movie is not as good as it's made out to be. hence, the movie is overrated to that particular person. so in that regard... I am sure just about everyone could find movies that they feel are not as good as they are made out to be (i.e. at least slightly overrated) and some movies that are a lot worse than they are made out to be (i.e. very overrated) etc. This one I am not as sure on as it seems like it could vary a bit from person-to-person... but just my immediate reaction to that 'meh' term seems to suggest average-ish range. like not horrible by any means but not really that good either. hence, about middle-of-the-road/average. so in short... when I see 'meh', I think average. hence, Thumbs Down at the end of the day as it's not something people will want to re-watch which is where movies are ultimately made or broke in my mind is whether the person wants to re-watch a movie or not. politicidalAgreed, obviously. because 'entertainment value' pretty much translates into some sort of feeling/emotional response the overall movie gives the viewer in some form or another and we rate them accordingly as the more it does that (in a good way obviously) the higher the score and once it fails to reach a certain level of that the movie ultimately is a Thumbs Down. because after you have seen plenty of movies you can just tell where a movie rates based on the general feeling/emotional response you get from watching the overall movie play out. because, like I always say, movies are ultimately broke down into one of two categories for me, which are... -6/10 or higher = Thumbs Up (will re-watch) -5/10 or less = Thumbs Down (won't re-watch(with rare exception)) because that simple thing cuts through the BS as movies of any real worth are movies I want to re-watch here and there as the years pass as movies that fail to be re-watch worthy are ultimately a Thumbs Down. CatmanYeah, as it's kind of funny seeing those movies from roughly the 1980's trying to depict the future as they almost always seem to go way over the top vs reality with clothing they wear etc. because I don't expect peoples clothing to change all that much from what we have currently seen already. so say even in 50-100 years from now, short of some flying vehicles type of stuff happening I would not expect the general world (like peoples houses/cars and the like) and people's clothing/hair styles and the like to be all that much different from what we have today. vegalyraI see what you mean here as that could be one way to try to look at things if one is trying to see things from a different perspective etc. but at the end of the day... movies are all about entertainment which boils down to a emotional response/feeling it gives the viewer. darkreviewer2013 it appears we are pretty much on the same page as I feel pretty strongly about the pre-1960 vs 1960's date being the general point of when movies got good as prior to around that time frame movies are simply too different and not in a good way. but then again... I suspect there are plenty of people out there who feel similar-ish to myself in that 'old movies' simply don't connect with viewers to any strong degree like modern movies do as modern movies just have a lot more emotional punch/feeling in some form or another. I am sure you get the gist since you got a similar opinion to myself it seems and are probably seeing what I see in movies as I can't quite say exactly what it is but that pre-1960's movies generally hit that cut off point to where they start to become quite a bit different, and not in a good way, vs say more recent-ish movies over the last 30 years etc. p.s. but with that said... the vast majority of My Favorite Movies are made in the 1990's to date. |
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Nov 22, 2018 7:05:13 GMT
For me, dated is the first echo of a film after a new era has begun. A few years into that, dated films often become classic, good & bad alike.
I recently watched Christmas Vacation, which early 00's felt dated because it's a modernistic take on Christmas. Now with even more time passed, & less of the film trying to feel current in my mind's eye, it's purely & finally a true classic.
|
|
|
|
Post by them1ghtyhumph on Nov 22, 2018 7:11:02 GMT
I grew up on dated movies
|
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Nov 22, 2018 23:38:43 GMT
it appears we are pretty much on the same page as I feel pretty strongly about the pre-1960 vs 1960's date being the general point of when movies got good as prior to around that time frame movies are simply too different and not in a good way. but then again... I suspect there are plenty of people out there who feel similar-ish to myself in that 'old movies' simply don't connect with viewers to any strong degree like modern movies do as modern movies just have a lot more emotional punch/feeling in some form or another. I am sure you get the gist since you got a similar opinion to myself it seems and are probably seeing what I see in movies as I can't quite say exactly what it is but that pre-1960's movies generally hit that cut off point to where they start to become quite a bit different, and not in a good way, vs say more recent-ish movies over the last 30 years etc. p.s. but with that said... the vast majority of My Favorite Movies are made in the 1990's to date. I think they just had a very different aesthetic going on in films made prior to, say, the 60s. The acting styles tended to be more akin to what one would see in a stage play and the manner in which everything was filmed makes it harder for me to suspend disbelief. The fact that most vintage movies are in black-and-white doesn't help matters either. The above doesn't apply to all movies from before 1950 and I'm not dissing works from that era either, but in general I believe that it was in the second half of the 20th century that cinema really came of age. The fact that I grew up watching late 20th century movies likely played a big role in the formation of that mindset. |
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Nov 23, 2018 5:36:40 GMT
darkreviewer2013That's a decent point there in bold which I think is a factor in why the pre-1960's movies tend to be a bit so-so as a general guideline. as for the whole black-and-white thing... I don't think that really bothers me much strictly on that because The Hustler (1961) is within my Top 21 movies straight up and that's black-and-white. but speaking of black-and-white movies... taking a quick look through My Favorite Movies there is pretty much 5 movies that are black-and-white (i.e. Angel-A (2005)/The Hustler (1961)/Nebraska (2013)/The Artist and the Model (2013-2013)/The Song of Bernadette (1943)). so even though black-and-white movies can be strong for me, color generally is best as I think we would all agree with that as it gives more life to things as while black-and-white can give off a certain kind of effect etc, as a general rule, color just gives more life to movies. I see. but personally I think more recent movies (basically the later half-ish of movies) just are all around better made today than they used to be which I think at least partially comes back to your 'stage play' comment. like what we see on screen lacks a certain style etc that more modern movies have. While what we grew up watching (more recent-ish movies) might be some factor, I think it's more than that as, assuming my estimates are accurate, I think the masses as a whole probably mostly avoid the old movies as they are just more empty feeling. probably comes back to, at least partially, what you said on the 'stage play' stuff. makes it feel a bit less authentic, like it's more acting and less like a real person with emotion etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Nov 23, 2018 23:50:02 GMT
darkreviewer2013 That's a decent point there in bold which I think is a factor in why the pre-1960's movies tend to be a bit so-so as a general guideline. as for the whole black-and-white thing... I don't think that really bothers me much strictly on that because The Hustler (1961) is within my Top 21 movies straight up and that's black-and-white. but speaking of black-and-white movies... taking a quick look through My Favorite Movies there is pretty much 5 movies that are black-and-white (i.e. Angel-A (2005)/The Hustler (1961)/Nebraska (2013)/The Artist and the Model (2013-2013)/The Song of Bernadette (1943)). so even though black-and-white movies can be strong for me, color generally is best as I think we would all agree with that as it gives more life to things as while black-and-white can give off a certain kind of effect etc, as a general rule, color just gives more life to movies. Agreed. There are a number of black-and-white movies that I enjoyed. The Artist (2011) - which you mentioned there - happens to be one of them. And the 1965 thriller The Nanny, also shot in black-and-white, is one of my favourite Hammer films. The lack of colour produces a distancing effect though, whereas the use of colour gives them more life and a greater sense of realism. For me anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by permutojoe on Nov 24, 2018 1:47:16 GMT
I don't think anyone said yes which I think means we're all old.
|
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Nov 25, 2018 18:20:47 GMT
darkreviewer2013You must have misread what I typed  The Artist and the Model (2012-2013) (clicking it takes you to the IMDb page for the movie) is what I mentioned and it's unlikely many people know about that due to only 1,393 votes on IMDb (which is barely anything) and I doubt it would have mainstream appeal given the type of movie it is. but I have seen that movie three times so far (Feb 14th 2014/Sep 9th 2014/Nov 4th 2018) and it improved in score on my 3rd viewing as my first two viewings it was a 7/10 (which makes it within my Top 188 movies) and on my 3rd, which was earlier this month, it went to a 7-7.5/10 which makes it not that far outside of my Top 101 movies. a side note... Claudia Cardinale, who's probably most known for Once Upon a Time in the West (1968), has a smaller role in that movie. p.s. since you brought it up... The Artist (2011) was not bad but it's ultimately not a movie ill re-watch. hence, Thumbs Down. I have seen some Hammer movies from the 60's and 70's last year (i.e. 2017) but I have not seen that particular one you mentioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Nov 26, 2018 2:51:19 GMT
maybe a personal quirk but, for me, movies, in general,ARE timeless ! I do not understand this whole "dated" concept or what it means.
"Over-rated" is another popular phraseology that leave me wondering what they are talking about. How does many people liking a movie very much mean that it is a bad movie ? "Critques" that merely say "meh" as an opinion.. WHAT is that ? oops … wandering off the "dated" track … There seems to be two ways of using the term. 2. just a quick way to say you don't think a movie is anywhere near as good as the majority I use meh sometimes. It means average/mediocre. That's how I use it. I don't know why so many people have such an issue with it. It doesn't even necessarily mean you don't like it, just that you don't like it as much as the general consensus. I can totally understand people using it in that way in respect to a highly celebrated film that they feel doesn't quite live up to it's reputation. |
|
|
|
Post by MCDemuth on Nov 26, 2018 3:29:06 GMT
I HATE the term "Dated" because so many people over use the term to describe Older Movies... Movies made from 20+ years ago, are not supposed to look or feel like today's movies... Seriously, How the fuck were directors, ETC. supposed to make "future proof" movies? Almost every movie ever made and will be made will feel "Out Of Date", in someway, at some point... If people can't grasp that concept... that is THEIR problem, not the Movies & TV Shows themselves... Dated should only be used to describe something "Old School" being featured in today's world... Like a brand new Transformers movie, featuring a High Tech Transformer, such as Soundwave, transforming into a Cassette Player... Since MOST PEOPLE DON'T use Cassette Player's anymore... And so, that disguise wouldn't be very useful in 2018... I don't have a problem with watching older films... that were a "product" of their time... Such as Tron & WarGames & The Lawnmower Man... I am quite capable of recognizing that the movies were made decades ago, with different movie technologies... most of which were the best that the industry had to offer at that time... |
|
|
|
Post by MCDemuth on Nov 26, 2018 4:11:09 GMT
"Over-rated" is another popular phraseology that leave me wondering what they are talking about. How does many people liking a movie very much mean that it is a bad movie ? I don't like the term overrated either, because it sounds arrogant. There seems to be two ways of using the term. 1. the majority are idiots and my opinion is superior 2. just a quick way to say you don't think a movie is anywhere near as good as the majority I don't like underrated/overrated as well... for similar reasons... But, basically, because I think the terms are usually used backwards... People should use them like this... I don't understand why so many people loved "Star Wars" (1977)... I hated the movie... I guess my opinions, about the film, are Under-rated!We all hated the movie: "Howard The Duck" (1986), and everyone else that we know, hated it too... But Johnny Smith loves the movie, and constantly talks about how great it is... His opinions, about the film, are Over-rated!There is nothing wrong with having a minority opinion... Everyone's tastes are different... Just don't insult the Majority, by saying THEY don't know how to rate a movie... Because we all know, that is not how the world works... |
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Nov 26, 2018 4:52:04 GMT
I HATE the term "Dated" because so many people over use the term to describe Older Movies... Movies made from 20+ years ago, are not supposed to look or feel like today's movies... Yes it is really a very stupid term. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2018 6:24:02 GMT
No. I like a number of old movies and grew up watching Doris Day, Audrey Hepburn, Deborah Kerr, Katharine Hepburn, Ava Gardner, Elizabeth Taylor, Grace Kelly, Marilyn Monroe, Jerry Lewis, Rock Hudson, Cary Grant and Dean Martin movies with my Aunt and I still enjoy watching them every now and then. I watch more older movies than newer movies and some of my all time favs are 70s, 80s and 90s Horror movies. 
|
|
