1982 - A great year for movies

[Moonchild]

@Robert163

1994:

Best:

The Shawshank Redemption
Pulp Fiction
Forrest Gump
The Lion King (I really don’t consider animated movies, movies, but… )
Natural Born Killers
Legends Of The Fall
Clerks

Second best:

Speed
Interview With The Vampire
The Crow
Ed Wood
The Professional
Stargate

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=17377571

Don’t forget (1994):

Bullets over Broadway
Hoop Dreams
Quiz Show
Crumb
Swimming with Sharks
The Professional
The Paper
Secret of Roan Inish
…and my all-time favorite mocumentary, …And God Spoke (technically a 1993 movie because of it’s tour of the Indie circuit, but so what).

[Kimballkid]

@bobot

You forgot Grease 2,

@Robert163

is grease 2 really that highly regarded as a movie?

@Ellis_Aponte_Jr

Which makes it even more remarkable that those films are so great.

Grease 2 was not then, and is not now, highly regarded. Look at the imdb ratings: Grease 7.2, Grease 2 4.1. That’s a historic level dropoff for a sequel.

But, Michelle Pfeiffer.

[Ellis_Aponte_Jr]

@Evil_Captor

I agree. Some great films were made during the Hayes Code era. But that does not change the fact that I think every film made during that time should have an asterisk next to its name.

Let’s apply that logic to other artistic fields.

Some pretty great novels were written in the 19th Century, but they should each have an asterisk next to their title because there were so many words common to us that authors couldn’t use back then.

Rembrandt did some great work but all of his paintings should have asterisks because he wasn’t allowed to paint all the subjects that contemporary artists can.

Cole Porter could only write about four-letter words, not use them, so he can’t be considered as good as today’s songwriters.

Getting back to panache45’s list, to me the only question is, are those films great or are they not? I would say most of those are great films, period.

[Ellis_Aponte_Jr]

@Robert163

that would probably mean something to me
if i cared about film history
but, i prefer movies that are actually: entertaining

Doesn’t your original question presuppose some kind of historical context, though?

I would agree that 1982 was one of the best years for movies - of the post-1980 era.

[bobot]

@Kimballkid

But, Michelle Pfeiffer.

And by the way, I’ve got a rep to protect.

Michelle Pfeiffer - Cool rider

[panache45]

@Evil_Captor

Yes, but all those films were crippled by the Hayes Code. Not what they might have been. The 1982 batch, despite their weaknesses, could at least express themselves freely.

Are you saying that “Sorry my dear, I don’t give a flying fuck.” would make GWTW a better movie? How about Dorothy and the scarecrow sleeping on the same bed, with nobody’s feet on the floor? Not to mention an anatomically-correct cowardly lion, with a lion-sized erection whenever he’s near the tin man.

And it’s not like today’s films have no artistic limits. What do you think the rating system is?

[EllisDee]

@panache45

What do you think the rating system is?

Fundamentally different than the Hays Code.

[RikWriter]

@nevadaexile

Guess those films are too highbrow for you.
I suppose that you’ll be looking for to the latest installments of the Fast & Furious and Transformer franchises.

They have things that go BOOM! in them.:smack:

Yeah, that MUST be it…the fact that I can laugh at your high-handedness must mean that all I like are car chases and explosions. You go right and tell yourself that if it makes you feel better, buddy.

[Evil_Captor]

@panache45

Are you saying that “Sorry my dear, I don’t give a flying fuck.” would make GWTW a better movie? How about Dorothy and the scarecrow sleeping on the same bed, with nobody’s feet on the floor? Not to mention an anatomically-correct cowardly lion, with a lion-sized erection whenever he’s near the tin man.

And it’s not like today’s films have no artistic limits. What do you think the rating system is?

Oh, puh-leeze. It wasn’t just about the sex. The Hayes Code had a whole bevy of restrictions for filmmakers. Here they are!

@The Hays Code authors

    Pointed profanity – by either title or lip – this includes the words "God," "Lord," "Jesus," "Christ" (unless they be used reverently in connection with proper religious ceremonies), "hell," "damn," "Gawd," and every other profane and vulgar expression however it may be spelled;
    Any licentious or suggestive nudity – in fact or in silhouette; and any lecherous or licentious notice thereof by other characters in the picture;
    The illegal traffic in drugs;
    Any inference of sex perversion;
    White slavery;
    Miscegenation (sex relationships between the white and black races);
    Sex hygiene and venereal diseases;
    Scenes of actual childbirth – in fact or in silhouette;
    Children's sex organs;
    Ridicule of the clergy;
    Willful offense to any nation, race or creed;

And be it further resolved, That special care be exercised in the manner in which the following subjects are treated, to the end that vulgarity and suggestiveness may be eliminated and that good taste may be emphasized:

    The use of the flag;
    International relations (avoiding picturizing in an unfavorable light another country's religion, history, institutions, prominent people, and citizenry);
    Arson;
    The use of firearms;
    Theft, robbery, safe-cracking, and dynamiting of trains, mines, buildings, etc. (having in mind the effect which a too-detailed description of these may have upon the moron);
    Brutality and possible gruesomeness;
    Technique of committing murder by whatever method;
    Methods of smuggling;
    Third-degree methods;
    Actual hangings or electrocutions as legal punishment for crime;
    Sympathy for criminals;
    Attitude toward public characters and institutions;
    Sedition;
    Apparent cruelty to children and animals;
    Branding of people or animals;
    The sale of women, or of a woman selling her virtue;
    Rape or attempted rape;
    First-night scenes;
    Man and woman in bed together;
    Deliberate seduction of girls;
    The institution of marriage;
    Surgical operations;
    The use of drugs;
    Titles or scenes having to do with law enforcement or law-enforcing officers;
    Excessive or lustful kissing, particularly when one character or the other is a "heavy".

Asterisk deserved.

And yes, some great movies were made during the tenure of the Hays Code. Just as some artists create great paintings with a deliberately limited palette. But if government said, 'You artists can’t use blue, gray or orange in your art" then yeah, asterisk deserved.

And while it’s true that the cultural mores of any time have a lot to say about how films are made and what they have to say, but films also change with the times and also can be a force for change themselves. The Hays Code was like a jar that trapped film mores in 1933 … for thirty years.

Asterisk deserved, my friend.

[Drunky_Smurf]

@nevadaexile

Guess those films are too highbrow for you.
I suppose that you’ll be looking for to the latest installments of the Fast & Furious and Transformer franchises.

They have things that go BOOM! in them.:smack:

The Transformers is the best franchise since Back to the Future.

[lew_cody]

1924 was a fine vintage:

Girl Shy
Gösta Berlings saga
Greed
He Who Gets Slapped
Her Night of Romance
Hot Water
The Iron Horse
Isn’t Life Wonderful
Kean
Der letzte Mann
Manhandled
The Marriage Circle
The Navigator
Die Nibelungen
Peter Pan
The Sea Hawk
Secrets
Sherlock Jr.
The Thief of Bagdad
Three Women
Wild Oranges

[Ellis_Aponte_Jr]

@Evil_Captor

Asterisk deserved.

I think, ultimately, you have to evaluate a film on the basis of what’s in it, not on what’s not in it. While it’s valid criticism to point out the lack of some element in a film, ultimately you have to look at the actual content that’s there.

And if you agree that some films of the Code era are great, what does it mean to place an asterisk next to one’s title? “This film, although great, could theoretically have been greater had it been made in a completely different era”? I don’t see what that adds.

[EllisDee]

@Ellis_Aponte_Jr

And if you agree that some films of the Code era are great, what does it mean to place an asterisk next to one’s title? “This film, although great, could theoretically have been greater had it been made in a completely different era”? I don’t see what that adds.

More along the lines of “It’s great for a Hays Code film.”

[Ellis_Aponte_Jr]

“Hamlet is great… for an Elizabethan drama” etc.

[Siam_Sam]

@Drunky_Smurf

The Transformers is the best franchise since Back to the Future.

Only the first one was good. The rest sucked bilge water.

[Evil_Captor]

@Ellis_Aponte_Jr

I think, ultimately, you have to evaluate a film on the basis of what’s in it, not on what’s not in it. While it’s valid criticism to point out the lack of some element in a film, ultimately you have to look at the actual content that’s there.

And if you agree that some films of the Code era are great, what does it mean to place an asterisk next to one’s title? “This film, although great, could theoretically have been greater had it been made in a completely different era”? I don’t see what that adds.

How about, “This film, although great, was made under the control of a highly restrictive censorship program. It may not have fully reflected the tastes and sensibilities of its creators, or of the actual culture it sprang from.”

You could say the same about most network television programming as well.

[suranyi]

@Evil_Captor

How about, “This film, although great, was made under the control of a highly restrictive censorship program. It may not have fully reflected the tastes and sensibilities of its creators, or of the actual culture it sprang from.”

You could say the same about most network television programming as well.

I still don’t see what that adds. When I watch a great movie from that era, say “West Side Story”, “To Kill A Mockingbird”, or “Lawrence of Arabia”, I’m enthralled by what’s on the screen. I don’t have time to ponder what might have been left out.

[Evil_Captor]

@suranyi

I still don’t see what that adds. When I watch a great movie from that era, say “West Side Story”, “To Kill A Mockingbird”, or “Lawrence of Arabia”, I’m enthralled by what’s on the screen. I don’t have time to ponder what might have been left out.

Fine, you’re OK with censorship. I’m not.