I will avoid films that were released before 1980.
Films released in the 80s I will be cautious about watching.
I am put off by any sign of a dated look in films. I guess I’m spoiled for what can be done in films these days (SFX, more realistic, more freedom to move the camera, less ‘values’ getting in the way, less of an emphasis on the main characters being almost god-like - though it still happens, more suited to the short attention span people have today)
I didn’t much enjoy watcing the star-wars ‘sequels’ (the IV, V and VI) because of the dated look. I prefered the remastered versions.
Allthough the prequels are much more rushed and less ‘intelligently’ created affairs, I prefer them because I’m a sucker for SFX and the modern look (and I can potentially identify with the actors better - Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman)
One notable exception to the general rule is The Great Escape. Although it is not B&W it is as old as that. It doesn’t matter if it looks dated because it IS set in the past. It covers an era of great interest to me. It has a good cast. And it is exceptionally well made.
So apart from the reasons stated in brackets above (if they can be called reasons) does anyone share this ‘snobbery’ for modern films? Can someone who doesn’t explain it, and convince me to give old films a try?
I love old movies. Even if they are horribly dated and the acting etc. seems strange to my modern eyes.
I watched Sullivan’s Travels and two Abbot and Costello meet … movies over the xmas and enjoyed them a lot. They are a interesting view on the past and how people in those days acted and looked like(clothes etc)
There are some fantastic b/w movies. You are definitely missing out putting them all in the same basket.
You’re missing out. I’m just the opposite – a B&W film on TV always gets my attention (though I have no issue with modern films, either).
The major difference about older films is that they were about story. Modern films are about either special effects or relationships.
In addition, the best comedies are all in B&W. They are by far more sophisticated, and funnier than anything I’ve seen recently (except maybe for Hot Fuzz)
I’m developing an idea for an independent film project. It’s true that B&W film is cheaper than colour film, and I won’t have to worry about tungsten-balanced film vs. daylight-balanced. But really the way I envision it, it will ‘work’ better in B&W. Two characters will wear ‘vintage’ clothing in one segment, but the stories take place in the present. I just like the look of B&W.
For me I have a problem with it because of the over-acting. Old movies are still somewhat mired in the stage tradition. It wasn’t until about the 80s that film became its own medium as distinct from stage, and people recognize that one could capture much more subtle movement. For stage acting you exaggerate everything so that the audience in the back can see it. For film you don’t need to exaggerate anything because the camera can see down your pores. So for me old movies just have terrible acting and I have trouble getting past it, though I’ve become more tolerant as time goes by.
Even though we’re almost exactly the same age, I’m sort of opposite of you.
I hate hate hate special effects in new movies. I absolutely adore all of the original Star Wars movies because - dude, they did all that with MODELS and PUPPETS!!!
I’ve still never seen Jurassic Park or any of the Terminator movies because…yawn
I don’t shun movies because they’re B&W or look dated, but I do agree with Reverse & mswas in that the acting is often quite hard to get around. There’s so much pausing for effect and too-drawn-out scenes. Almost like The Family Guy
I agree,the old b/w movies seem to have better and more indepth stories and are usually better written then the films of today which all too often are aimed at the lowest common denominator with simplistic plots and a carcrash/shooting/explosion every ten minutes in case the viewers attention wanders.
Story and Plot seem to be dirty words in Hollywood nowadays.(But not always)
(I just picked up the Preston Sturges boxed set. Can’t wait to revisit these classics.)
See David Mamet’s book Bambi vs Godzilla: On the Nature, Purpose, and Practice of the Movie Business, specifically the chapter beginning on page 77, “How Scripts Got So Bad.”
So, no Gone With the Wind? No Faye Wray version of King Kong? No Bela Lugosi Dracula movies? None of that Coen brothers movie with Billy Bob Thornton? No…no Hepburn and Tracy?
Sorry, but this is a wholly preposterous statement. Subtle, inflected, non-stagy, realism-based acting has been around since the 30s, and became virtually a cinematic revolution in the 50s (the “method”). And stagy, hyper-stylized, scenery chewing still exists in huge doses today. Beside the advent of digital technology, absolutely no significant cinematic convention was evident in the 80s (editing, camera mobility, etc.) that hadn’t already existed for decades.
No Bette Davis? Joan Crawford? Rita Hayworth? No Clark Gable, Cary Grant? No cornball dance numbers with chorus boys and Technicolor spangles and feathers? I’ll agree, a lot of old black and white movies are dull and talky and full of old people, but a lot are classics. I thank God every day, seriously, that I have TCM. I refuse to watch any movie on TCM that I saw in the movie theater, I want the OLDIES. I’m bored and unimpressed by lotsa big 'splosions, CGI, nameless nobodies running from monsters/“falling in love”/and generally filling up the airwaves as well as any cell phone commercial. Any movie made after 1980 is, as a rule, noisy filler for the Sesame Street generation to gawk at, populated by nobodies named Jennifer.
Try Anatomy of a Murder with Jimmy Stewart, a court room drama that is B&W made in 1959. Very adult dialog for the time as well as great music and morally devious characters. Not the total white hat or black hat assigned characters that were often featured in old movies.
Look at Mary Poppins or the Wizard of Oz the backgrounds (at least in OZ) are very unconvincing. Mary Poppins looks almost like a theatre show in terms of background etc.
I would hate to miss those two.
What about Rear Window? That looked like a stage play too, but a very good movie.
I agree the old films were about story. But then again they were made when radio was the main competition, and this is why I LOVE old time radio, nothing is scarier than what you think of in your mind.
Or even odder, for instance was when Jack Benny went from radio to TV. One of the biggest let downs was they couldn’t do the “fat jokes” about Don Wilson. OK they did but they weren’t funny because there was no way on earth Wilson could’ve been as fat as he was made out to be on the radio.
So I think audiences were just more acceptive toward things back then. Now it’s all about special effects. I, for instance, HATE the new type of animation like in “The Bee Movie,” etc.
But you are not alone, I tell my friends that complain about the cost of movies why not go to the library and check out the movies for free. And everyone complains, “But they’re old.” I’m like but they are new to you
And really Rita Hayworth, Marie McDonald, or Grace Kelly can easily hold their own against any beauty of Hollywood today
I certainly don’t. I think there have been great movies made in every decade, certainly at least back until around the mid 1930s. And there have been tons of great black and white movies.
There’s nothing to explain. A movie works for you or it doesn’t. Of my top ten movies, only one was made after 1990.
