 |
|
|
|
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... 3 4 5 6  Previous Next
|
|
"I don't like old movies" |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 141 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting JonM
James Stewart is my favourite actor too. A mate of mine is always going on about a film called "Dynamite Man from Glory Jail", currently unavailable on DVD. Ever seen it?
no, but I'm going to have to add it to my list, thanks for bringing up another title. |
|  | JonM | | Registered 28 Dec 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 343 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting themoviemaster: Quote:
no, but I'm going to have to add it to my list, thanks for bringing up another title. Lol, glad to be of service! It does sound great fun. | | | Jon
"When Mister Safety Catch Is Not On, Mister Crossbow Is Not Your Friend."
 |
| | Registered: March 16, 2007 | | Posts: 405 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Kathy: Quote:
I like old & new movies! I never thought Lord of the Rings could be made - I LOVE the books - yet I thought the computer generated scenes complimented the "real" scenes. Gollum was fabulous - he seemed real to me. Anyone who eliminates a movie based on the year it was produced is narrow minded, short sighted, and unworthy of any of your collection. I couldn't agree with you more. As a kid, a movie geek growing up in the age of special effect spectaculars, I always wanted to see Tolkien's LOTR brought to the silver screen, even debated it with friends and we knew then it was too large a task for any studio to partake during that day and age. I love all movies and I can find masterpieces among almost all genres and I truly respect the work and effort put forth to make King Kong and dinosaurs live in 1933 as much as I admire and respect the work and effort to bring them both too life in 2005!!! | | | | My Collection!!! |
| | Registered: May 29, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,475 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Calidain: Quote:
Quoting Kathy:
Quote:
I like old & new movies! I never thought Lord of the Rings could be made - I LOVE the books - yet I thought the computer generated scenes complimented the "real" scenes. Gollum was fabulous - he seemed real to me. Anyone who eliminates a movie based on the year it was produced is narrow minded, short sighted, and unworthy of any of your collection.
I couldn't agree with you more. As a kid, a movie geek growing up in the age of special effect spectaculars, I always wanted to see Tolkien's LOTR brought to the silver screen, even debated it with friends and we knew then it was too large a task for any studio to partake during that day and age.
I love all movies and I can find masterpieces among almost all genres and I truly respect the work and effort put forth to make King Kong and dinosaurs live in 1933 as much as I admire and respect the work and effort to bring them both too life in 2005!!! I was going to start by saying "when I was young" but that makes me sound like my grandfather!!  I grew up loving Ray Harryhausen special effects which I'm sure some of today's "young whippersnappers" would feel are outdated and unworthy of watching. Yet, even today, I, like you, enjoy admire, and respect the work and effort of yesterday's as well as today's film makers. As for the Lord of the Rings, I have read the book every year for decades. I honestly never thought a film (or 3!) could ever live up to my dreams and expectations. I'm grateful that self-proclaimed "geeks", and the family of New Zealanders, were entrusted to bring one of my favorites to life. |
| | JonM | | Registered 28 Dec 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 343 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Kathy: Quote:
I grew up loving Ray Harryhausen special effects which I'm sure some of today's "young whippersnappers" would feel are outdated and unworthy of watching. Well when I was a kid (1980s), I remember seeing Jason and the Argonauts and loving the fight with the skeletons. I knew they were puppets of course, but that didn't stop me being terrified by their grins and the horrible clacking noise. There was something tangible and substantial about them. The Mummy Returns had similar things and they were bloody awful. For what it's worth, I though most of the effects for The Mummy Returns were horrendously bad. Especially the pygmies. And for that matter, Ray's work easily outshines almost everything in the Kong remake, apart from Kong himself. The dinosaur stampede I just found odd. I really enjoyed the film, I have to say, but it brings up an interesting point. Why is it that when I watched stop motion stuff, like Clash of the Titans, Sinbad or The Argonauts, I knew it was an effect, but didn't care? Yet when a poor CGI shot comes on, it's like a slap in the face and can spoil the film. I think it's because you know that stop motion is painstaking work that takes great care. But I have a sense that while CGI takes similar skill, I associate bad CGI with sheer laziness. Take the new Kong. The title character was an amazing creation that was absolutely convincing, but it's almost like they couldn't be bothered with the dinosaurs in the stampede. Maybe just too ambitious, but I'm still sulking because in other shots you know they are capable of jaw dropping quality. | | | Jon
"When Mister Safety Catch Is Not On, Mister Crossbow Is Not Your Friend."
|
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 2,652 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting GSyren: Quote:
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. For me, when I was a kid, Tora! Tora! Tora! was a yardstick by which anything and everything was measured! When I was 9 or so, I had seen the movie and then a few weeks later was taken to a really great live show to which I responed to my parents query with "Wow, that was even better than Tora! Tora! Tora!" - and at the top of my voice too!  I still love that movie and searched everywhere for it on DVD. To me CGI is definitely not the be all and end all of good effects. Some of the early effects are still far superior to those we get today. I mean, and here I am climbing onto a hobby horse, look at some of the rubbish they are making today as cartoons. The graphics are awful and the animation even worse! Give me something like 'Tom and Jerry' any day. The modern animators rely too heavily on CGI and as a result we get bad quality animation (not all are bad by a long shot, though). Ok., I am now off the hobby horse!  | | | <---------Mithrandir, Laverne and Shirley
Caroline |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 467 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting themoviemaster: Quote:
I prefer the older titles as well, depends on the mood. Jimmy Stewart was the MAN, waiting for them to release "No highway in the sky", as well as "Jeopardy" with Barbara Stanwyck, "Dalton Girls" with Merry Anders (won't hold my breath on that one), and "One touch of Venus" with Ava Gardner, and hoping Fox gets their act together and start up with the film noir series again soon, I looked forward to them as well as the studio classics. The stories relied more on character development, where you actually felt something for the person, now you don't have any connection, example: Poseidon Adventure 1974: I felt for Shelly Winters when she died, but the remake, I can't even remember who died and who lived, but the waves looked good though.
best Director: Alfred Hitchcock
best Actor: Jimmy Stewart
best Actress: Ava Gardner with Paulette Goddard as a close second
who are some of your favorite classic directors and actors?
most times a movie works better in black and white, when they add color (Ted "mr. colorize everything" Turner) it doesn't work as well. Best Directors: Steven Spielberg, Sam Raimi and Quentin Tarantino Best Actors: Jackie Chan, Kirk Douglas and Kevin Costner Best Actresses: Sigourney Weaver, Nicole Kidman and Kate Mulgrew To name 3 of each. I have much more. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 467 |
| | Posted: | | | | I like old movies like "Spartacus". This is an awesome movie. The good old James Bond movies are good too. The same with old western movies. Like "For a Few Dollars More", "The Magnificent Seven" and "A fistful of Dollars" to name a few. Old war movies are good too, like "The Bridge on the River Kwai", "Guns of Navarone" and "The Heroes of Telemark". I can go on, but I think that's enough. Old movies are good. Many of the new movies have only special effects and no story. I hate those movies. | | | | Last edited: by pompel9 |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 6,744 |
| | Posted: | | | | I'd never put FX over story (me hates Star Wars PT).
But movies from before the mid-seventies? I'm too young for this shít. | | | Karsten
DVD Collectors Online
 | | | | Last edited: by DJ Doena |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,804 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting DJ Doena: Quote:
But movies from before the mid-seventies? I'm too young for this shít. apparent  | | | | Thorsten |
| | JonM | | Registered 28 Dec 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 343 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting DJ Doena: Quote:
But movies from before the mid-seventies? I'm too young for this shít.  On the contrary, I was born in 1975. I think it's a sign of great intelligence and maturity when you can list favourite films that were before your time!  Ahem, assumptions this would impress women were, well, wrong. | | | Jon
"When Mister Safety Catch Is Not On, Mister Crossbow Is Not Your Friend."
|
| | W0m6at | | You're in for it now Tony |
| Registered: April 17, 2007 |  Posts: 1,091 |
| | Posted: | | | | I think the 1933 King Kong was awesome. Didn't think much of Peter Jackson's effort (visually spectacular yes, but I didn't like the humanising of the Kong).
Meanwhile, 1933 isn't just before *my* time, it's before my grandmother's! | | | | Adelaide Movie Buffs (info on special screenings, contests, bargains, etc. relevant to Adelaideans... and contests/bargains for other Aussies too!) |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | This discussion is close to becoming one of those all-night gabfests where we tried to define "art".
Are films significant, needing evaluation, placing their art & literature in context of the history of film or are they merely contemporary popular art?
Can anyone understand Star Wars enough without knowledge of The Hidden Fortress? Pulp Fiction without Citizen Kane? The Magnificent Seven without The Seven Samurai?
Does knowledge of old films decrease the enjoyment received by newer films?
Or does filmgoing today require turning off all understanding of what has come before? | | | If it wasn't for bad taste, I wouldn't have no taste at all.
Cliff |
| | Registered: March 16, 2007 | | Posts: 405 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting JonM: Quote:
And for that matter, Ray's work easily outshines almost everything in the Kong remake, apart from Kong himself. The dinosaur stampede I just found odd. I really enjoyed the film, I have to say, but it brings up an interesting point.
Why is it that when I watched stop motion stuff, like Clash of the Titans, Sinbad or The Argonauts, I knew it was an effect, but didn't care? Yet when a poor CGI shot comes on, it's like a slap in the face and can spoil the film.
I think it's because you know that stop motion is painstaking work that takes great care. But I have a sense that while CGI takes similar skill, I associate bad CGI with sheer laziness. Take the new Kong. The title character was an amazing creation that was absolutely convincing, but it's almost like they couldn't be bothered with the dinosaurs in the stampede. Maybe just too ambitious, but I'm still sulking because in other shots you know they are capable of jaw dropping quality. Well I believe you are missing the most obvious difference...you were young and you probably didn't know or really care how the effect was done, you were just in awe of how cool it was. I loved Jason and the Argonauts and Harryhausen's Sinbad movies because as a kid they were cool and adventurous and different from what my parents wanted to watch at the theater. As an adult today I admire and respect the classic black and white films my parents were into in their young adult lives but I really could care less about them when I was a pre-teen. In the same sense as an adult now we can easily say we don't like todays standard of music vs. music of our generation and the same can be said on how we rate and appreciate todays movies vs. what we grew up watching!!! | | | | My Collection!!! |
| | JonM | | Registered 28 Dec 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 343 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Calidain: Quote:
Well I believe you are missing the most obvious difference...you were young and you probably didn't know or really care how the effect was done, you were just in awe of how cool it was.
I loved Jason and the Argonauts and Harryhausen's Sinbad movies because as a kid they were cool and adventurous and different from what my parents wanted to watch at the theater. As an adult today I admire and respect the classic black and white films my parents were into in their young adult lives but I really could care less about them when I was a pre-teen.
In the same sense as an adult now we can easily say we don't like todays standard of music vs. music of our generation and the same can be said on how we rate and appreciate todays movies vs. what we grew up watching!!! I don't believe that's true. I think you accept whatever you are presented with as long as it stays consistent within the logic and context of the whole thing. Phew!  That goes for all elements. You don't see actors being swapped for doubles in dodgy wigs because the star got bored. But I think that happens with CGI. Stop-motion, plasticine, and full-screen animation all force consistency. Kind of like, while you're doing one properly, you may as well do them all. Ray's old effects didn't alter throughout the film so I accepted them for what they were. With CGI, you aren't limited by talent, but by money, hard drive space and rendering time. I reckon they spent all the time on Kong and tried to render the rest on the last night! "Damn, we spent all the time on Kong's scar, but the grass is still a weird purple colour! Ah, sod it, no-one'll notice ..." | | | Jon
"When Mister Safety Catch Is Not On, Mister Crossbow Is Not Your Friend."
|
| | Registered: March 16, 2007 | | Posts: 405 |
| | Posted: | | | | When I watch Jason and the Argonauts today I see the movie differently than I did as an 8 year old at the theater seeing it for the first time. The magic is still there but I can understand how the magic was created and it changes the viewing experience!!!
Nowadays we are provided with "Behind the Scenes..." and "The Making of..." special features on DVDs and it is very much like the magician inviting you to see "The Turn"!!!
Each person's view of such things is relevant of course and you perhaps still see the magic of Argonauts and for that you are blessed.
Here is a modern version of what I am talking about...Jurassic Park!!! Upon seeing JP at the age of 24 I remember sitting with my Dad and we both thought how great the movie was, the dinasaurs looked incredibly real to us then. That movie is 14 years old now and no longer draws the same reaction from me simply because of how far CGI has come, but I still enjoy the movie!!! | | | | My Collection!!! |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->General: General Discussion |
Page:
1... 3 4 5 6 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |