• bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 hours ago

    my lord that’s depressing lol.

    When people think something from 2014 is “old” i laugh in their face as I crank up my 1899 Edison victrola.

    Even as a kid I never viewed something old unless it was 60+ years in the past.

  • Beacon@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I feel like movies haven’t changed much at all since around mid 90s. Like as long as current day fashion doesn’t appear in the movie, then i don’t see how a person would even be able to tell if a movie came out today vs. twenty years ago.

    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Cellphones changed shape.

      90s movies did not have ‘MillenialSpeak’ / ‘Marvelisms’. They had cheesy one-liners. Which were better.

      Club scenes are no longer filled with Goths, they’re filled with Jocks and Popular Girls.

      Scores are generally much less unique and interesting these days.

      More frantic pacing, contemplation is not allowed, outside of arthouse films.

    • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      There’s actually quite a lot that’s changed in cinema since then. Since digital cameras and effects are incredibly common these days, we light everything very flatly so that it’s easier to change in post without reshoots. It makes lighting abysmally bad. (See wicked where the actress in vibrant green makeup looks a little grey the entire movie).

      Pacing is also much faster, there’s more emphasis on not confusing audiences rather than letting things have mystery. Dialogue is more quippy rather than grounded.

      Oh! And since there’s no more mid-budget movies, there’s a whole lot less comedies running around. Everything is either high budget, wall-to-wall action or grounded indie films with very little in-between.

    • Eq0@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      The pacing got much faster over time. Comparing LotR with a new MCU film, you clearly notice the shift. (Admittedly, LotR was a little slower than the average movie at the time)

      • Beacon@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        That’s not a valid comparison, lotr was waaaay slower and longer than movies of its time. If you want to compare against a modern mcu movie then you have to compare to a similar type of movie, like for example even years before lotr look at men in black from 1997

    • baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 hours ago

      i recently rewatched the first jurassic park and wow is it so incredibly different from new movies. i don’t dislike it though.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        Effects have gotten better, but they’ve made everything else worse. Costume? Add it in post. Proper lighting? Add it in post. The entire set? Add it in post.

        Add second screen syndrome and every new movie and TV show is perfect to have on in the background while you scroll through Facebook

  • superweeniehutjrs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I know a highschooler that won’t watch anything from before 2000, won’t watch lotr for other reasons like broken attention span.

    • paultimate14@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I find myself dreading watching anything made after 2010.

      I’m not saying everything is bad, or that everything that was earlier was good. But dang…it seems like a good 90% chance the modern movie or TV show is just a bunch of flashy and disruptive CG, incredibly fast editing to try to compete with cell phones for attention, tons of with clips and one-liners. Everything is poorly lit, the dialogue is inaudible, and all the other sound is way too loud.

      And I don’t think it’s just “things were better back when I was a teenager” bias. I can still find older movies with those some annoying traits earlier, 2010 is just the arbitrary cutoff I’m using here. And I can look back at movies from before I was born, like Hitchcock movies, and see how much better they are at handling a lot of those things.

      • bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 hours ago

        The fact that we’ve gotten to the point where looking at little screen is bad so we need to lock it up to stare at big screen, is depressing.

        And I love movies, but the thought of that as a society is depressing.

        But, it’s all good FreeVee isn’t it?

        • Banana@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 hours ago

          It’s honestly one of my favourite marathons to do on a cold winter weekend, excited for my annual viewing :)

          • GandalftheBlack@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Yeah, back in uni I used to do one with my friends at least once a year. We’d get about 10 people crammed into a room with a monitor, bring an unhealthy amount of snacks, plan to start at 9am, have tech issues till 11 or 12, and then watch until midnight or 1am with a break for pizza in the evening. It was great.

            • Banana@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              6 hours ago

              That does sound great, may be time for a sleepover viewing with the friends methinks, with some pipe weed

      • prettybunnys@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I own exactly one Blu-ray set, and got my Xbox series X because it plays blu-rays.

        For the extended edition directors cut of lotr. 12 hours of goodness.

    • jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      11 hours ago

      That’s like saying “I refuse to drink wines older than 2000.” Just because it’s old doesn’t mean it’s good. But, some of the old ones are very, very good.

      • Banana@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I watched Altered States for the first time a few years ago and that one got me more than most modern sci fi. It’s a masterpiece imo.

        • Beacon@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          35 minutes ago

          iirc that movie is like a crazy abstract art film, it’s surprising that Hollywood was willing to make it

    • cRazi_man@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I know a woman in her thirties with that same rule. She won’t watch the first Matrix movie.

    • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I finished rewatching all 6 movies yesterday and damn they are long. The last one is fuckin 4h long. But i still didnt have an attention span problem.

  • BananaOnionJuice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    11 hours ago

    At least LOTR has not been rebooted every 5-10 years like some Marvel/DC movies.

    Even if there’s probably someone itching to make a gritty reboot of LOTR.

    • wieson@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I mean, look at the source material. One’s an epic saga the other’s a monthly brochure at the magazine corner shop.
      I guess, it fits.

  • fibojoly@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Well, we had the Prequel Trilogy so I guess Peter Jackson probably needs to do an entirely unneeded Fourth Age Trilogy or something?

    • ICCrawler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Prequel even harder and pry the Silmarillion rights from the cold, dead bodies of the Tolkien Estate, then run it into the ground with new films, or worse, a TV show.

      • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Better yet, don’t pry the right, so you have to come up with entirely new stories and new characters outside of what you already own the rights to! It’ll be great!