I want you (she’s so heavy) is great, I’ll grant you that.
Film "It was groundbreaking when it came out": so what?
- Thread starter OleBoiii
- Start date
I want you (she’s so heavy) is great, I’ll grant you that.
You're embarrassing yourself. Unless you really are that stupid.
What about Golden Slumbers? That's just lovely.
Already admitted that it's stupid. None of this is rational and I fully agree.
Maybe you're right.
,
Love this thread though. Have you listened to a podcast called Cinema Swirl? It's basically a guy showing his mate a bunch of classic movies. His mate hasn't seen any of them. His reaction to watching these films for the first time are brilliant.
Fair enough, well at least I take it back about the irony being lost on you.
That’s very true, probably because many of these people studied their music at school/college. But they’re obviously not shit
I guess it's because music - for me anyway - can generate an emotional response if it is something I love. So I find it really difficult to imagine that other people don't have the same response as me because I love it so much. In fact, I love it so much that if I know somebody really does not like it I find it quite jarring and uncomfortable. I realise this is completely dumb but it's just a natural reaction I have. Not proud of it but it's there.
I should add that this is only for the stuff I genuinely love from the bottom of my heart - not all music. Most music I can like and be fine with others not liking it.
Sliced bread, while convenient is vastly overrated.
Agreed.
Adding the film tag to a thread doesn't work 
Then again the topic is relevant to more than just film, so I'm happy that it has lead to a lively discussion.
Then again the topic is relevant to more than just film, so I'm happy that it has lead to a lively discussion.
Is that just with music or does it apply to your favourite films, actors, musicians, food, hobbies, locations etc., etc. too?
Just music. It's odd huh.
I think you underestimate how revolutionary sliced bread was. Imagine living in a time where people picked at the bread.
Films that are effects-heavy tend to be the first to show their age, with Terminator 2 and The Matrix being prime examples of that.
I don't know about that. I watched both of these recently and they don't look trash as opposed to some other old action/effects-heavy movies.
Even if a film's effects age badly, they still should remain entertaining, which Matrix and Terminator 2 do. Watching a film like Citizen Kane now just feels pointless style over substance. I appreciate what it did at the time but watching it for the movie and only the movie? It's not good at all in this day and age.
With that said, 12 Angry Men is bloody amazing. Will never get old!
Don't get me wrong, they still look decent and I still really enjoy them both but they remain good films because of factors other than effects, which is why the first Terminator film is better than number 2 - despite having a fraction of the budget. I'm not blown away by them visually any more, as they definitely show their age, which ends up being the case with all groundbreaking cinematic spectacles, from Star Wars to Jurassic Park. It's a built-in inevitability that they'll lose their lustre.
The truly great films have great stories, screenplays, dialogue, direction and performances, which is why they stay relevant. 12 Angry Men is a perfect example - no effects, just 12 men talking in a small room for 90 minutes with a man's life at stake. But it's much more exciting to me than most modern action films, as everything about it is pitch-perfect. It doesn't need rampaging CGI dinosaurs or liquid metal assassins.
Although Michael Bay might disagree.
Visuals are also a very important. We're talking about film after all.
It all boils down to what the point of the visuals are, though. If it's realism/pushing the envelope in terms of technology, then I agree that time will effectively "kill" the movie. But if the goal is make something beautiful or visually interesting, then time is of no serious concern. At least if we're talking post WW2.
Jesus Christ I can’t believe what I’m hearing. Simplistic tosh? Not sure what your musical credentials are but this is so far from true!
I feel the same way and completely understand
We were talking about films like Terminator 2 and The Matrix - films where the visuals are there to wow you, with ever decreasing results over time. Obviously they have very different visual aims than the true greats like Hitchcock and Scorsese, who'd use colours and change the mise en scene to denote feelings and/or comment on the deeper themes of their films.
That rare moment where 2 internet people find they're in agreement over something. Feels a bit weird to be honestWe're in agreement then
Beatles are as irrelevant as Spurs in the current climate.
I'm glad I'm not the only one, thought I was going mad.
I'd say turning that shite sticking out the ground into something like bread is the real innovation. Using a sharp object to slice it, meh, it's smart, but not the real game changer.
This is, objectively and subjectively, a shite post.
I guess it's where the divide between Art and Design comes into play.
Citizen Kane deserves respect and praise, but it doesn't mean it's a great "movie" by modern standards. If it still was then I'd imagine that Orson Welles himself would be disappointed that cinema hadn't taken his baton and sprinted forward with it.
Are the Wright Brothers pioneers? Absolutely, but I'm not going to jump onto the Flyer to get me to Australia. Nor am I going to listen to music on a machine made by Cros or Edison. All deserve the utmost respect for their vision and making changes that, maybe to this day, haven't really been topped in terms of taking steps forward. But innovation is always about making something better than what came before it.
Which is why Scary Movie 5 is the greatest film ever made.
Citizen Kane deserves respect and praise, but it doesn't mean it's a great "movie" by modern standards. If it still was then I'd imagine that Orson Welles himself would be disappointed that cinema hadn't taken his baton and sprinted forward with it.
Are the Wright Brothers pioneers? Absolutely, but I'm not going to jump onto the Flyer to get me to Australia. Nor am I going to listen to music on a machine made by Cros or Edison. All deserve the utmost respect for their vision and making changes that, maybe to this day, haven't really been topped in terms of taking steps forward. But innovation is always about making something better than what came before it.
Which is why Scary Movie 5 is the greatest film ever made.
Jurassic Park is better than Jurassic World, and it's because of what you remember from it. I remember being amazed by Park when it first came out as CG was still in its infancy, but what really stuck out was the atmosphere, the tension, the sheer scale. World doesn't have any of that, just pretty dinosaurs that didn't even look that impressive when it came out because every film does it nowadays.
We're at a point now where bad CG sticks out more than the good CG used to, and we've grown bored of seeing big shiny spectacles on the screen if there's nothing else to back it up. If the only thing your characters do is have close ups open mouthed then I'm not going to give a shit about them when they're in trouble. In fact, I'll probably cheer and have a cheeky wank to celebrate when they die.
Terminator 2 is not a very good example of more special FX but inferior substance. Terminator 2 is brilliant and better than its predecessor in every way.
This is objectively, my subjective opinion that should be taken as gospel. Or is it for gospel?
This is objectively, my subjective opinion that should be taken as gospel. Or is it for gospel?
I just use a dislike of the Beatles as a quick way to figure out somebody has shit taste in music.
Some of what they did was groundbreaking at the time and still has not been bettered.
The Beattles performed in a Blokker store in The Netherlands once, because normal venues didn't want to host those Godless heathens.
That alone makes them winners for me. Even if they look like One Direction without the good looks.
That alone makes them winners for me. Even if they look like One Direction without the good looks.
Yeah that was the best thing and then someone sliced it which became the new best thing. We haven't innovated since slicing bread but hopefully we will.
I can't think of many groundbreaking (non-animated) films from my childhood other than Jurassic Park and The Matrix. Since then, maybe you can add Inception to that, but I am not sure.
I think animation has come a long way, but to be honest, I do miss the old style animations like Lion King. They seemed to have a bit more care to them compared to more recent animations.
I think animation has come a long way, but to be honest, I do miss the old style animations like Lion King. They seemed to have a bit more care to them compared to more recent animations.
1917 pops to mind as a technically groundbreaking war film.
Pulp Fiction and Memento were in terms of storytelling, not following a basic three act structure chronologically.
There are probably others I just can't remember.
I'll give you memento yes. Not seen 1917. I've seen pulp fiction only once and forgotten it. Definitely one of those classics I need to watch again at some point!
Either way it's gospel because it's correct and comes with my confirmation so it's now ironclad.
All music is subjective. As is all art. It's not like it's a breeze block where you can only objectively say "this is a breeze block".
Unless a breeze block is inserted up a cow's arse, in which case it becomes art for some subjective reason.
How can you not like 12 angry men??!!!! Incredible film