Strong Style Mod
USER IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
11,073 POSTS & 11,287 LIKES
|
Post by Emperor on Dec 24, 2019 16:37:22 GMT
Things change over time. Personal tastes change. Cultural norms change. Technology changes. Therefore the perception of something created in the 80s could change when viewed from 2019. With regards to cinema, the most obvious example is special effects. Most special effects that shocked and amazed people in the 60s and 70s are completely laughable by modern standards.
With regards to Raiders of the Lost Ark, the most obvious evidence of its dated-ness is its humour, specifically its casual racism and stereotypes of nazis and Middle Eastern people. That kind of humour would never fly nowadays, and perhaps it shouldn't, but it was acceptable and funny during its time.
I never watched Raiders in the 80s, but when I did watch it, I had the awareness to know that a lot of things don't appeal to me as they may have to an 80s version of myself. So when I say Raiders is dated, it's not a criticism. It's just a statement. It's a product of its time, and that's fine. On the other hand, a film that was made a long time ago and doesn't appear "dated" is praiseworthy. Such as The Breakfast Club. The themes in that film are still relevant to this day, and we can all relate to being stuck in detention and having some asshole teacher holding you down, and so on.
|
|
Legend
USER IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
Fan Fic Legend
27,269 POSTS & 19,953 LIKES
|
Post by UT on Dec 24, 2019 16:50:04 GMT
A lot of what Emp said , though I generally don’t even hold the subject of humor against movies since it was a different time. It’s just not funny no matter what they are riffing on and comes off as lame. The holding up comment comes a ton from that - it’s pacing and everything else also makes it far less enjoyable.
Themes , times , the world changes in a ton of ways. A lot of movies can still be just as enjoyable as ever - some can’t. Hence the idea of them not holding up.
I know I’m in the minority with the thought though , most consider the entire Indy series timeless.
|
|
God
5,226 POSTS & 4,219 LIKES
|
Post by thereallt on Dec 24, 2019 16:52:45 GMT
Not better than The Breakfast Club. Takes a giant shit on The Breakfast Club. Raiders is easily a top 5 80's movie and made #4 on my list. This is the movie that pretty much DEFINES what an adventure movie should be. Everyone has been copying what Raiders has brought forth ever since. I see Raiders on my TV I sit my ass down and watch. I see Breakfast Club on my TV and it's an instant channel changer. Also the idea that The Breakfast Club isn't dated is absolutely laughable to me.
|
|
Legend
USER IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
Fan Fic Legend
27,269 POSTS & 19,953 LIKES
|
Post by UT on Dec 24, 2019 16:56:25 GMT
Not better than The Breakfast Club. Takes a giant shit on The Breakfast Club. Raiders is easily a top 5 80's movie and made #4 on my list. This is the movie that pretty much DEFINES what an adventure movie should be. Everyone has been copying what Raiders has brought forth ever since. I see Raiders on my TV I sit my ass down and watch. I see Breakfast Club on my TV and it's an instant channel changer. Also the idea that The Breakfast Club isn't dated is absolutely laughable to me. Yeah because high school isn’t a thing anymore....
|
|
God
5,226 POSTS & 4,219 LIKES
|
Post by thereallt on Dec 24, 2019 16:57:16 GMT
I still don't understand this concept of a movie being "dated" in the slightest. People put way too much emphasis on creation date. I don't find it ever has even the smallest inkling of a hint of a remote connection to the quality or ability to "still enjoy" a movie whatsoever. Bad movies are just bad. Sure, people may have enjoyed some older films at the time. Just like a ton of people enjoy Twilight today. Maybe I was in a bad mood when I watched Raiders a few years ago though. That does have an actual impact on my enjoyment sometimes. You might have preferred Last Crusade. Sean Connery stars in it as Indy's dad. Great interaction between him and Ford in that one.
|
|
Moderator
USER IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
8,706 POSTS & 8,531 LIKES
|
Post by Big Pete on Dec 24, 2019 17:05:04 GMT
Furthermore, censorship before the late 60s was extremely strict, limiting the scope of movies and what directors could cover on screen. In the case of Indiana, I actually think it's a timeless movie. The problem is that it inspired so many other film makers that a lot of the aspects that set it apart have become the norm. It's like going back to the early episodes of say The Simpsons and trying to understand why the show was so controversial. Or even how the early Beatles could be considered rebellious. Other shows or bands came along and pushed the envelope further, same with Indiana. Other movies have come along since with it's tone, namely the marvel comic book movies feel very similar to Indiana Jones. Hell from the bit I saw of Aquaman, it seemed like they got bored so they just started re-enacting scenes from Indiana Jones.
I still had Raiders reasonably high on my list at #8. It's just a fun take on the adventure genre with one of the most iconic characters in cinematic history and a strong supporting cast. I think it may have the best opening sequence of any film of the decade.
|
|
Legend
19,061 POSTS & 12,948 LIKES
|
Post by RT on Dec 24, 2019 20:01:06 GMT
I had Raiders at 13 on my list. It was one of the first movies my dad encouraged me to watch when I was young and getting into action/adventure stuff. I’m glad he did because it was great.
It’s kind of funny ranking movies with such a broad topic because we end up in arguments like this current one. I don’t know how you can even compare Raiders of the Lost Ark and The Breakfast Club. Literally the only thing they have in common is that they came out in the 80s.
|
|
Senior Member
2,865 POSTS & 2,221 LIKES
|
Post by Lionheart on Dec 24, 2019 21:00:47 GMT
Things change over time. Personal tastes change. Cultural norms change. Technology changes. Therefore the perception of something created in the 80s could change when viewed from 2019. With regards to cinema, the most obvious example is special effects. Most special effects that shocked and amazed people in the 60s and 70s are completely laughable by modern standards. With regards to Raiders of the Lost Ark, the most obvious evidence of its dated-ness is its humour, specifically its casual racism and stereotypes of nazis and Middle Eastern people. That kind of humour would never fly nowadays, and perhaps it shouldn't, but it was acceptable and funny during its time. I never watched Raiders in the 80s, but when I did watch it, I had the awareness to know that a lot of things don't appeal to me as they may have to an 80s version of myself. So when I say Raiders is dated, it's not a criticism. It's just a statement. It's a product of its time, and that's fine. On the other hand, a film that was made a long time ago and doesn't appear "dated" is praiseworthy. Such as The Breakfast Club. The themes in that film are still relevant to this day, and we can all relate to being stuck in detention and having some asshole teacher holding you down, and so on. Yes, but I don't care about the general average taste trends of society or what most people generally like currently and I don't know why anyone else would either. My taste is what matters and it isn't going to find movies bad just because they were made in a different time period. Other people may find the movies bad, but that's completely arbitrary anyway. In fact, it would be completely biased nonsense if the reason is literally just because it is an older film. What is the actual problem with the movie that they would be complaining about by saying it "doesn't hold up"? It's just a silly statement that doesn't mean anything.
If there is something about the film that you don't like that was more common of films in the past, you should just state that directly as the reason you don't like it. You can't blanket apply "not holding up" as a term for all older movies because they are all drastically different. It's like if you said a modern film "doesn't hold up to the standards of the past". It's just bullshit that promotes the ideals of snobby assholes who think modern films are superior and that they know better than you.
As for humor, it's not like something that was funny before is suddenly not funny just because it's no longer politically correct. I'm pretty sure stereotyping nazis is still considered acceptable though.
The only valid point on this is special effects. Special effects can "not hold up", but this has little indication on the movie as a whole. If the movie is now bad just because the effects no longer look cool then was it really a good movie in the first place? It either is still a good movie with some lame looking effects or it was a shit movie all along that managed to wow people with its graphical gimmickery for a time.
|
|
Legend
USER IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
Fan Fic Legend
27,269 POSTS & 19,953 LIKES
|
Post by UT on Dec 24, 2019 21:56:44 GMT
Wait what? What are you even arguing? That every movie ever holds up?
You can think a movie doesn’t hold up and not just because it’s old. Some movies are timeless , some are not. It can be a fair assessment.
|
|
Senior Member
2,865 POSTS & 2,221 LIKES
|
Post by Lionheart on Dec 24, 2019 22:05:12 GMT
Wait what? What are you even arguing? That every movie ever holds up? You can think a movie doesn’t hold up and not just because it’s old. Some movies are timeless , some are not. It can be a fair assessment. If it’s a good movie, yes. It may fade in and out with societal changes in the minds of the sheep, but it is their weak opinions that don’t hold up. The movie itself remains a stationary structure. It can be a fair assessment? Based on what critera? Who is deciding that? My argument is that any logical reasoning behind determining a movie doesn’t “hold up” is essentially just criticizing it based on its actual attributes that have nothing to do with that meaningless statement. It’s like a sneaky way of trying to say a movie sucks without directly insulting someone. It’s patronizing them to make it seem like the movie was once okay but that they’re still wrong.
|
|
Moderator
USER IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
8,706 POSTS & 8,531 LIKES
|
Post by Big Pete on Dec 24, 2019 23:29:16 GMT
I just think it's a simple short hand way of stating that other movies have come along and taken aspects of these classic movies and improved on them to the point where the movie feels inferior to when it came out. Or even that the movie no longer resonates with them as much as it did when they were younger.
|
|
Strong Style Mod
USER IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
11,073 POSTS & 11,287 LIKES
|
Post by Emperor on Dec 24, 2019 23:48:49 GMT
Wait what? What are you even arguing? That every movie ever holds up? You can think a movie doesn’t hold up and not just because it’s old. Some movies are timeless , some are not. It can be a fair assessment. If it’s a good movie, yes. It may fade in and out with societal changes in the minds of the sheep, but it is their weak opinions that don’t hold up. The movie itself remains a stationary structure. What an outrageous statement. Evaluation of art is subjective, and even though the movie stays the same, a person's opinion of a movie can change drastically over time for any number of reasons, "dating" being just one of them. To give one small example, I probably wouldn't have ranked Breakfast Club #1 on my list if I hadn't rewatched it a few months ago. Upon rewatching I came to appreciate the movie a lot more. It may not even have placed Top 5 if I was basing my judgment on my original viewing however many years ago.
|
|
Senior Member
2,865 POSTS & 2,221 LIKES
|
Post by Lionheart on Dec 25, 2019 0:01:14 GMT
If it’s a good movie, yes. It may fade in and out with societal changes in the minds of the sheep, but it is their weak opinions that don’t hold up. The movie itself remains a stationary structure. What an outrageous statement. Evaluation of art is subjective, and even though the movie stays the same, a person's opinion of a movie can change drastically over time for any number of reasons, "dating" being just one of them. To give one small example, I probably wouldn't have ranked Breakfast Club #1 on my list if I hadn't rewatched it a few months ago. Upon rewatching I came to appreciate the movie a lot more. It may not even have placed Top 5 if I was basing my judgment on my original viewing however many years ago. Does this mean Breakfast Club didn’t hold up but then you watched it again and it reconstructed itself? I don’t think you are talking about the same thing.
|
|
Legend
19,309 POSTS & 19,611 LIKES
|
Post by Ness on Dec 25, 2019 0:05:03 GMT
Not better than The Breakfast Club. This is my new movie ranking criteria.
|
|
Strong Style Mod
USER IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
11,073 POSTS & 11,287 LIKES
|
Post by Emperor on Dec 25, 2019 0:22:12 GMT
What an outrageous statement. Evaluation of art is subjective, and even though the movie stays the same, a person's opinion of a movie can change drastically over time for any number of reasons, "dating" being just one of them. To give one small example, I probably wouldn't have ranked Breakfast Club #1 on my list if I hadn't rewatched it a few months ago. Upon rewatching I came to appreciate the movie a lot more. It may not even have placed Top 5 if I was basing my judgment on my original viewing however many years ago. Does this mean Breakfast Club didn’t hold up but then you watched it again and it reconstructed itself? I don’t think you are talking about the same thing. The Breakfast Club thing was just an example of how my opinion of a movie changed over time. Doesn't have anything to do with "holding up".
|
|
Senior Member
2,865 POSTS & 2,221 LIKES
|
Post by Lionheart on Dec 25, 2019 0:24:29 GMT
Does this mean Breakfast Club didn’t hold up but then you watched it again and it reconstructed itself? I don’t think you are talking about the same thing. The Breakfast Club thing was just an example of how my opinion of a movie changed over time. Doesn't have anything to do with "holding up". Oh. I never thought opinions of movies couldn’t change. That was kind of the point. The fickle and foolish emotions of the masses are in constant flux. But the quality of the movie rests in perpetuity.
|
|
Strong Style Mod
USER IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
11,073 POSTS & 11,287 LIKES
|
Post by Emperor on Dec 25, 2019 0:28:06 GMT
What is the quality of the movie, if not the perceptions of the viewers, which can change over time, and therefore not rest in perpetuity?
|
|
Senior Member
2,865 POSTS & 2,221 LIKES
|
Post by Lionheart on Dec 25, 2019 0:36:34 GMT
What is the quality of the movie, if not the perceptions of the viewers, which can change over time, and therefore not rest in perpetuity? The quality of the movie is the quality of a movie. It cannot be defined by perceptions. What if only three people ever saw Breakfast Club and thought it was terrible? Would that mean it was terrible? No, it’s the same movie as if everyone saw it. That makes no sense. You could make an argument that it’s “the only truth that matters” as anyone aware of it thinks so, but that is a philosophical argument that has nothing to do with reality.
|
|
Strong Style Mod
USER IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
11,073 POSTS & 11,287 LIKES
|
Post by Emperor on Dec 25, 2019 0:42:29 GMT
That's nice of you to tell me what a quality of a movie is not, now can you please tell me what it is? "The quality of the movie is the quality of a movie" is not an answer. What if only three people ever saw Breakfast Club and thought it was terrible? Would that mean it was terrible? Sure. Why not? I can't think of a better way to evaluate the quality of a movie. Look at IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes. They rank movies on a scale based entirely on the average rating of fans and critics.
|
|
Senior Member
2,865 POSTS & 2,221 LIKES
|
Post by Lionheart on Dec 25, 2019 3:05:43 GMT
That's nice of you to tell me what a quality of a movie is not, now can you please tell me what it is? "The quality of the movie is the quality of a movie" is not an answer. What if only three people ever saw Breakfast Club and thought it was terrible? Would that mean it was terrible? Sure. Why not? I can't think of a better way to evaluate the quality of a movie. Look at IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes. They rank movies on a scale based entirely on the average rating of fans and critics. I can think of a better way. It's called Filmology. And it tells you exactly what the quality of a movie is. We've discussed this topic many times in the past, on these very forums even, but perhaps you have forgotten. I will let my college website project from many years ago do the talking so I do not have to reiterate:
|
|
Legend
23,184 POSTS & 12,594 LIKES
|
Post by 🤯 on Dec 25, 2019 11:31:12 GMT
Nothing like a film philosophy argument between Lionheart and Emperor to kick off Christmas morning on the east coast! Thank God for Tapatalk. Also, I'm confused... Was Emp saying stereotyping Nazis was/is a bad thing?
|
|
Strong Style Mod
USER IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
11,073 POSTS & 11,287 LIKES
|
Post by Emperor on Dec 25, 2019 11:45:24 GMT
I don't recall ever seeing that Filmology theory or website. Since my memory is infallible, it means you must have never told me about it. Sounds interesting though. Also, I'm confused... Was Emp saying stereotyping Nazis was/is a bad thing? Nah, just an 80s thing. At least the way it was done in Raiders.
|
|
Senior Member
2,865 POSTS & 2,221 LIKES
|
Post by Lionheart on Dec 25, 2019 16:50:03 GMT
Also, I'm confused... Was Emp saying stereotyping Nazis was/is a bad thing? It's simple. Emperor is a nazi. Have you never looked at his avatar!?
|
|
Senior Member
IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
I came, I saw, I came again.
4,852 POSTS & 1,955 LIKES
|
Post by RagnarokMike on Dec 25, 2019 22:50:25 GMT
While Raiders is the best of the progressively worse Indiana Jones films, never a big enough fan to make my list.
|
|
Legend
23,184 POSTS & 12,594 LIKES
|
Post by 🤯 on Dec 26, 2019 0:42:39 GMT
Also, I'm confused... Was Emp saying stereotyping Nazis was/is a bad thing? It's simple. Emperor is a nazi. Have you never looked at his avatar!? No avatars browsing on mobile, but that makes so much sense now.
|
|
Legend
USER IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
Fan Fic Legend
27,269 POSTS & 19,953 LIKES
|
Post by UT on Dec 26, 2019 15:57:22 GMT
|
|
Legend
USER IS OFFLINE
Years Old
Male
Fan Fic Legend
27,269 POSTS & 19,953 LIKES
|
Post by UT on Dec 26, 2019 15:59:23 GMT
I'm just happy it didn't make #1 , or even the Top 5 for that matter. Calling it a win for me.
|
|
Legend
23,184 POSTS & 12,594 LIKES
|
Post by 🤯 on Dec 26, 2019 16:20:54 GMT
I'm just happy it didn't make #1 , or even the Top 5 for that matter. Calling it a win for me. With you. It feels appropriate it's right there with Indiana Jones too. Those two can go give each other hand jobs for eternity.
|
|
Senior Member
2,865 POSTS & 2,221 LIKES
|
Post by Lionheart on Dec 26, 2019 20:56:33 GMT
Not my favorite, but it's a great movie. I'm just glad it beat the shit out of The Goonies, Ferris Bueller's Day Off, When Harry Met Sally, E.T. the Extra Terrestrial, Aliens, The Breakfast Club, and Raiders of the Lost Ark.
God, this list sucks. That's almost everything on it. Not that those are all bad movies, but for a BEST OF THE 80's stacked supercard to have all this on it...I am in disbelief. The true classics I voted for better come up above Star Wars.
|
|
Legend
23,184 POSTS & 12,594 LIKES
|
Post by 🤯 on Dec 26, 2019 21:23:36 GMT
Not my favorite, but it's a great movie. I'm just glad it beat the shit out of The Goonies, Ferris Bueller's Day Off, When Harry Met Sally, E.T. the Extra Terrestrial, Aliens, The Breakfast Club, and Raiders of the Lost Ark. God, this list sucks. That's almost everything on it. Not that those are all bad movies, but for a BEST OF THE 80's stacked supercard to have all this on it...I am in disbelief. The true classics I voted for better come up above Star Wars. I'm unclear from this post whether or not you're a fan of Star Wars?
|
|