I’ve been watching a lot of movies made in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s over the past year. Mainly westerns, but also quite a few thrillers and a comedy here and there.
I now find modern flicks are almost unbearable to watch:
The jerky camera movement annoys the hell out of me. In a given scene the camera view will change at least once a second.
Loud and very compressed music blaring in my ears the entire time. There’s no such thing as just two people talking; even during simple dialog scenes there’s synthesized music and occasionally some background noise. Why??
CGI, even when it’s not needed. And most CGI looks so fake that it takes me away from the movie.
I agree. Technical “marvels,” loud music/noises and quick cutting, instead of good writing, appeal to lazy viewers, and so lazy viewers is what they get. It’s a vicious circle.
Last night I watched a 90-minute Swedish TV mystery that had none of that stuff, and I was riveted. Character interplay between a dozen people, the occasional flashback (only to remind us of something we’ve already seen, that suddenly became relevant), no explosions or car chases or robots. I guess it helped that it was set in the 50’s so that people were used to interacting with each other instead of with devices.
But what do I know? I’m 67 and no-one’s target audience. For the OP, there are a few films that don’t do those things, but you have to hunt for them, and they may not be readily available in theaters unless you live in a major metropolitan area.
Ditto to all of you (including the age-- I’m 68). I prefer movies with actual, you know: plots, characters, a story line, good cinematography without falling back on special effects. I also do not like gratuitous manipulation of my emotions via shocking and graphic violence, particularly against children and animals. When I feel like my chains are being intentionally yanked by someone who doesn’t know how to do it otherwise, I bail immediately. The handheld camera also makes me nuts–thank you for starting that, Woody Allen.
Hey, Rod– what was the 90-min Swedish story you watched? Sounds like it’s right up my street.
Right up through the 1990s, I used to love going to the movies. Now I go to one maybe every other year. The last ones I saw were The Hateful Eight, Fury, and The Imitation Game.
Most of today’s movies are absolute crap churned out by people who don’t give a rat’s ass about quality. As long as there are idiots willing to pay for such tripe, the trend will continue.
? Even if we agree that there have been objective “advances” in recent filmmaking methods over the more “primitive” ones available to earlier generations, I don’t see how the mere existence of the earlier methods would distract you.
Do you also find it “distracting” to look at, say, early black-and-white photos because they don’t use color film? Or to look at prehistoric cave paintings because their pigments were cruder and less varied than modern paints?
CGI used in place of say, rear projection is fine.
CGI for explosions and the like, I don’t really know why they can’t do it better but they usually don’t. Something to do with persistence of vision and frame rates I think. Objects aren’t on the screen long enough for you to register them.
As for stories, with a few exceptions, I don’t really care that much, most stories are boring and the same; I’m much more into big scenery-chewing acting and lush photography.
I don’t go for any of the comic book/zombie/vampire/fantasy shit either, but modern photography (let’s say last 50 years) has it all over the older stuff, in spades. If some of those older films had been in color, it might be a different, uh, story. Color requires a lot more attention to art direction and lighting.
It’s called Crimes of Passion and I get it through MHz Choice. Based on novels by Maria Lang and starring a very fetching Ola Rapace. Unfortunately there are only 6 episodes available. MHz has some other series that I will be checking out.
I’ve seen a colorized version of Casablanca that was actually quite well done. However, it couldn’t hold a candle to the original B&W version, especially when viewed in a real cinema (and not on TV or in a multiplex).* The range of blacks, whites, and greys is simply stunning, and the images seem to shimmer before your eyes.
This is why they called it “The Silver Screen.”
*I saw it with friends at the Oktyabrskoe Cinema in Moscow, the largest movie theater in the world. The screen there is (or at least was, back in 1990) enormous!
I agree with this, especially with the loud music. Sometimes it doesn’t seem like it’s in the background at all. I find some tv shows to be the same way. The music completely drowns out any dialogue that’s going on.
I love old films. I even love silent films. My all-time favorite film is from 1942 (To Be or Not to Be), and my second favorite is from 1927 (Metropolis). The newest film on my DVR is from 1967, and most of the film are from the 30s and 40s. Even when I was a kid, I liked old movies. When the paper came with the new TV schedule, I’d get it and go through all the movies looking for anything from the 1930s or 1940s, and circle it. It was before VCRs, so if it was on at night, I’d set the alarm, and sneak into the living room and watch it. I usually fell asleep, but I’d catch enough of it. If it was on during school, and starred someone I really liked, or had four stars, I might try to work up a fake cold. I actually went to the doctor and submitted to a throat culture just to watch Gaslight. Totally worth it.
When I was 11, my grandfather bought me a 13-inch B&W TV for my room, which was so cool to me, I could barely contain myself. It made my covert nighttime movie watching easier.
I like movies in general, and recently had a good time at Wonder Woman, but I still love a film that people obviously cared about making. And there are some great performances that are unmatched-- you can’t use CGI to make something as funny as Irene Dunne in The Awful Truth (1937).
