 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->General: General Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 ...6  Previous Next
|
|
"I don't like old movies" |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
 | JonM | | Registered 28 Dec 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 343 |
| | Posted: | | | | Lol! I've had this argument over and over again, Gunnar. My dad was the most intelligent man I knew, but if anything, too practical. Only liked shoot 'em ups for films and truly believed there was no point to black and white film anymore because times have moved on and we have colour!  We often had friendly arguments about that. I always found it odd though because he was an excellent photographer, but he never touched black and white film again once Kodak Colour was on sale! And don't get me started on foreign! A friend of mine who is stubborn as heck once told me, "look, foreign film is boring. 'nuff said." This is after we had watched The Departed and I'd tried to explain that although brilliant, the original was leaner and slicker. No chance he'll ever watch it though. A girl at work was saying how good The Omen was. Yes I agreed, much better than the remake. Ahem. That's the one she'd seen and she had no idea it was a remake. If you ever ask someone for their favourite film, you know to end the conversation when they say "Spider-Man 3". That happened last week.  | | | Jon
"When Mister Safety Catch Is Not On, Mister Crossbow Is Not Your Friend."
 |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 793 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting GSyren: Quote:
When I double dip I usually bring the old DVD to work to see if I can give it to any of my coworkers rather that going thru the hazzle of trying to sell it. So today I brought my old copy of The Guns of Navarone to work. The following conversation ensued between me and one of my colleagues (in his mid thirties):
- Do you want my old copy of Guns of Navarone?
- I don't know. Is it any good?
- You haven't seen Guns of Navarone???
- No [takes the DVD and reads the back cover]. It's from 1961!
- Yes. So?
- They didn't have any cool special effects back then!
- Uh... what do you mean?
- No computer graphics.
- No, but it's still a really good film.
- Nope. I don't like old movies that don't have cool special effects.
- You're kidding, right?
- No. Have you seen The Dirty Dozen?
- Sure. Not one of my favorites, but it's a good movie.
- I almost fell asleep while trying to watch it.
- Have you seen Where Eagles Dare?
- Yeah. Boring!
At this point I just shake my head and leave. I put the DVD in a bookshelf where I usually leave stuff that I have replaced with better versions (usually VHS for DVD), hoping that there is someone at work who has better taste than my colleague.  I don't like any of those movies either, and don't tend to like a lot of old Hollywood movies, but I do like quite a few old foreign movies which seemed to me to be years ahead of Hollywood then in terms of plot, narrative, style, etc. If you can persuade them to watch something like THE WAGES OF FEAR, LE TROU, or THE SHOP ON MAIN STREET, I'm sure it will make them realise that old films can be great. Or stick with Hollywood and get them to watch 12 ANGRY MEN. That tends to change a lot of people's minds about how great black and white cinema can be. It's all about breaking down false assumptions that people make. Of course, if they watch them and still don't like them, then you have to respect that. We all look for different things from our movies  | | | | Last edited: by Squirrelecto |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 5,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have no problem with new films or CGI effects. I think Toy Story (1 & 2) were among the best films ever made. But what infants often fail to realize is the stuff made before their favorite films made those new films possible. Without DW Griffith's iris movement, we would never have developed zoom lenses. Without Eisenstein's cutting on the Odessa Steps sequence in Potempkin, we'd never have MTV style cutting today. Without Citizen Kane, Tarantino could never have made the time shifts in Pulp Fiction. All art, all entertainment, owes itself back to the arts and entertainments which came before it.
No one has ever broken down a good story more simply than Comedy or Tragedy... does the hero get married (or close)? Yes? Comedy! Does the hero self-destruct (especially die) instead? Yes? Tragedy. Old, yet currently fashionable.
People who enjoy only those films which have special effects as their main reason for existence probably find comic books their highest form of literature they enjoy. (Don't get me wrong -- I love comics, have written for them, and have taught a few semesters of a 3-unit university honors class on them.) Film (and literature) offers much more than just these small areas of enjoyment... trash as art & pure entertainment is one area of fun; complex art & literature are others. Sometimes, they overlap. I like Santo movies as much as I like The Best Years of Our Lives.
My wife & daughter love You've Got Mail. I love The Shop Around the Corner. Maybe someday I'll watch The Shop... with them. Maybe they'll enjoy it. My daughter is as likely to pull out an Astaire/Rogers film as a Hanks/Ryan one these days... If she, at the age of 16, can enjoy a film from 1934, anyone can. | | | If it wasn't for bad taste, I wouldn't have no taste at all.
Cliff |
| | Registered: April 7, 2007 | | Posts: 357 |
| | Posted: | | | | In films and music I can like all ages and genres if I am in the right mood. As for CGI it can be brilliant if used properly and it still may come full circle. During Curse of the Golden Flower I said to my other half that the CGi was very impressive. Watching the making of turns out they just built a huge palace and used hundreds of extras. Never occured to me they would do that these days |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 2,652 |
| | Posted: | | | | What would the world have been like without great movies like "Guns of Navarone" etc. They were well made and do not date. I love those sorts of movies. Some movies made in the 70's have dated badly especially with respect to the FX but other have not and those are really worth watching. Some of the movies made these days with the CGI are not great, while others are (eg "Lord of the Rings"). Just because a movie has CGI does not make it good, nor does a movie sans the CGI mean it is bad! What a narrow minded view! Still, their loss!  | | | <---------Mithrandir, Laverne and Shirley
Caroline |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,321 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr. Killpatient: Quote:
Quoting Mark Harrison:
Quote:
I like good movies and don't really care when or how they were made. Being good can cover a multitude of flaws whether they be bad CGI or bad practical effects.
But it is a funny story.
But excellent special effects can somewhat make up for a poor plot. That's a good point. I've picked up lesser movies because of their superior special effects. But once watched, those are the ones that collect the most dust. | | | Get the CSVExport and Database Query plug-ins here.
Create fake parent profiles to organize your collection. |
| | JonM | | Registered 28 Dec 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 343 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting VibroCount: Quote:
My daughter is as likely to pull out an Astaire/Rogers film as a Hanks/Ryan one these days... If she, at the age of 16, can enjoy a film from 1934, anyone can. I think the younger someone is, the more likely they are to watch something without question and likely enjoy it. A friend of mines son is about 13 now, but The Italian Job is amongst his favourite films. He must have first seen it when he was about 6 or 7. He also loves Bond films and doesn't bother to distinguish between old style and new; it's all Bond, it's all good! Also he has younger sisters, half his age. Now studios seem to think all cartoons have to be 3d Toy Story style, otherwise they'll fail. Well I've never seen those three kids more -what's the word?- 'hypnotised' than the day I played them Tom & Jerry. As you said, Cliff, the Toy Story films are magnificent, but for anyone who thinks it's the technology that's achieved it, show them the age old theme (so old it's mono 2d!) of cat and mouse smacking each other with over large mallets. | | | Jon
"When Mister Safety Catch Is Not On, Mister Crossbow Is Not Your Friend."
|
| | Dan W | | Registered: May 9, 2002 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 980 |
| | Posted: | | | | I hate the way this site causes these double posts all the time!!! | | | | Dan | | | | Last edited: by Dan W |
| | Dan W | | Registered: May 9, 2002 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 980 |
| | Posted: | | | | What, all this talk about special effects and no mention of Ladislaw Starewicz??? No Mention of TOHO and the suit acting in all of those Godzilla films? | | | | Dan |
| | Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dan W: Quote:
I hate the way this site causes these double posts all the time!!! May the  be with you. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 5,493 |
| | Posted: | | | | I read somewhere that the Apollo 11 landing on the Moon in 1969 had 50 % less computer hardware/software than your present day Car ..
Guess they wouldn't be impresed with that type of knowledge now or would they?? | | | In the 60's, People took Acid to make the world Weird. Now the World is weird and People take Prozac to make it Normal.
Terry |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 4,667 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting JonM: Quote:
If you ever ask someone for their favourite film, you know to end the conversation when they say "Spider-Man 3". I didn't dare ask what my colleague's favorite film was. I know he loved Lord of the Rings, so I guess there might be some hope. But it's probably just because of the great effects... I do know that he's all fired up about the new Transformers movie and intends to go see it on opening night. Personally I don't hold my breath when it comes to that one. From the team that gave us Pearl Harbor and Armageddon... not exactly a glowing recommendation in my book. The Rock had its moments, though, I'll admit that. Speaking of Pearl Harbor - I'd take Tora! Tora! Tora! and day over Pearl Harbor, but I guess my coworker would be bored to tears...  PS Just to make something clear; I have nothing against good CGI. But it's just another tool in the moviemaker's arsenal. Good CGI in a bad movie might make it somewhat more interesting, but it'll never make it a good movie. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
| | Registered: June 1, 2007 | | Posts: 19 |
| | Posted: | | | | CGI that announces itself is poor film making. An image, a film, or a song doesn't care how it was made, and neither should we, the question to be asked is if it is well done and effective or not. If a score dominates a film, it was not an effective score. If you hear everyone leaving a film talking about the CGI, it was not an effective film. Unfortunately, many moviegoers mistake cgi and MTV cutting for real cinema, and reward the Hollywood studios who churn out this pablum.
If you are not sure if something was cgi or a practical effect, it is effective. The message must rise above the medium, or it is just a technical exercise.
Chris |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,667 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting tuna: Quote:
If you are not sure if something was cgi or a practical effect, it is effective. I agree, but the reverse is not necessarily true. Some effects you know must be CGI because it's not possible to do them as a practical effect, and they can still be effective. I'm sure you didn't mean to imply otherwise. Other than that, I agree 100% with what you said. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
| | Registered: June 1, 2007 | | Posts: 19 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting GSyren: Quote:
I agree, but the reverse is not necessarily true. Some effects you know must be CGI because it's not possible to do them as a practical effect, and they can still be effective. I'm sure you didn't mean to imply otherwise.
Other than that, I agree 100% with what you said. Yes, sometimes, when you stop to think about it, it is obvious that only CGI could have accomplished it, but, if it is well done, in the moment, you don't recognize it as CGI. You just stay envolved in the film. Chris |
| | Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting tuna: Quote:
Yes, sometimes, when you stop to think about it, it is obvious that only CGI could have accomplished it, but, if it is well done, in the moment, you don't recognize it as CGI. You just stay envolved in the film. The scene in the Matrix movies where Neo is fighting the multiple Agent Smiths in the courtyard is a good example. The CGI wasn't quite realistic so I noticed it and lost the moment in the film as my mind strayed from the story & action to the technical side of the CGI generation. If they spent more time fleshing out (no pun intended) the textures for the skin and clothing, I would have never noticed and would have stayed involved. |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->General: General Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 ...6 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |