Jason143
Junior Member
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@glaceon
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 610
|
Post by Jason143 on Apr 17, 2021 17:34:34 GMT
Westerns are a good example. Take a couple of old westerns like Shane and Searchers which were made during the 50s. Now compare these with 2 from the modern era, like the remakes of True Grit and 3:10 to Yuma made in the 2000's. All these movies take place in the late 1800s. But which feels more authentic to the time period? The modern made ones with the more expensive set, costume and production design with sleeker, crisper cinematography? Or the older ones made in the 50s which are closer to the actual time period of the movie and have the grainy, archaic cinematography with simpler set design due to budget and limitations of technology at the time?
For me I prefer the older Westerns and by extension older made period piece movies. Any film made nowadays thats set in the 1800s or early 1900s doesn't feel visually authentic, even though a lot of effort and money has been spent to recreate the time period its set in with great detail along with state of the art camera tech.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Apr 17, 2021 17:52:23 GMT
Haha, for me, those are two modern examples that do a decent job carrying on the style of older westerns. More so than that Magnificent Seven remake which I did like but that one feels more contemporary with its action scenes and cinematography.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Apr 17, 2021 19:10:55 GMT
The older ones feel more authentic because they were closer TO the time of authenticity, there were still some old cowboys around when some of the early westerns were made, like having real WW1 veterans in All Quiet on the Western Front. Can't get that authenticity in the John Boy made for TV remake in the 70s, can't get it in the new one that's being worked on.
|
|
|
Post by SuperDevilDoctor on Apr 18, 2021 7:48:43 GMT
The older Westerns are easily the least "realistic".
In the main, the older films -- until, roughly, the advent of the spaghetti western in the 1960s -- feature much too brightly lit interiors.
Also, characters are typically too clean and all have great-looking teeth.
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Apr 18, 2021 16:28:19 GMT
Sometimes less is more. Not every period piece need be dripping in detail & eye candy.
As for westerns, that's their bedrock. Just as WWII films can seem more dramatic in black & white because that's how the world processed the events at the time.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Apr 18, 2021 16:43:45 GMT
Older westerns had actors who were more rugged in appearance. Tombstone distracted me with the pretty boy Melrose Place aspect to it. Not like the gnarly faces in a spaghetti western or the older US ones.
|
|