Movies too dated to be enjoyable

You’ve Got Mail aired over Christmas. It has lots of problems (not least of which being that Tom Hanks plays a creepy stalker who if he looked like Steve Buscemi would likely have been sued and involuntarily committed) but the computers used, the dial tone when connecting, and even “You’ve got mail!” all make it a timepiece but not in a good way.

Contact was one of my favorite movies when it came out, but their decision to use footage of Bill Clinton as the president and too much screen time to the '90s technology terribly date it for a movie that should be more timeless.

I made one, very recently :slight_smile:

A short mockumentary about a guy who had been involved in the CERN discovery of the particle that supposedly travelled faster than the speed of light. He claims he has found a way to send messages back through time. A camera crew goes to investigate, only to find that he is crazy. He is trying to communicate with his recently deceased wife. Whether time travel is possible, remains uncertain.

We made it shortly after CERN came out with their findings. We kept our fingers crossed the whole time, and it actually lasted quite a while.

I’m 35, but I’m dumb, and I love First Blood.

The first sequel rules – but dig the editing on it sometime. It’s a bad chop job.

But, dig the cinematography! Stellar – one of the best by THE best in the business ever was.

And the score by Jerry Goldsmith is awesome. I stay awake long winter nights humming fragments from it.

Oh, that reminds me - The Net was ridiculous already when it came out in 1995, but I guess the large number of people who hadn’t been on the internet yet could buy a movie with the internet as a sort of bogeyman.

Similar is “The Young Stranger”, a James(book 'em Danno)McArthur flick from 1957. The incipient JD protagonist puts his feet up and mouths off to an older guy at the theater and is not only kicked out of the movie, but the theater owner refuses to let him leave, and orders him into his office. It takes the owner and his burly uniformed henchman to drag the kid back in from the sidewalk. The kid is rightfully pissed, and a fight ensues. I’da been pissed, too.

Yeah, but the TV series had the very fine Brooke Langton. Even at that late in my sexual career I had many happy moments enjoying her fine performances.

The movie is dated because Sandra Bullock is a crumb bum.

I tried watching E.T. recently. BORING!

In terms of martial arts films, Bruce Lee’s “The Chinese Connection” (aka Fists of Fury) is pretty hard to watch because of not only the casual and constant anti-Japanese racism, but also the cheesy tip-offs (pompadours and sideburns! cars with fins!) that you’re in 1972, not the 1920s. It’s especially noticeable compared to Jet Li’s tribute remake “Fist of Legend”.

Scarface didn’t age well.

Yep. A few years ago, I went to a theater screening of The General, a black-and-white silent film starring Buster Keaton. The plot was neglible, but my og was it funny! Granted, it was slapstick, which is not tied to a particular cultural or historical context, but it was one of the best films I saw that year.

And for what it’s worth, Keaton was a genius at physical comedy. Just brilliant.

I gotta agree with all the disgust about Rebel Without a Cause. I wanted someone to punch whiny little snotnose James Dean in the face over and over again. I don’t think that’s the reaction the filmmakers had in mind.

Also about Love Story. It’s been awhile since I’ve seen it, but as I remember, Jenny was told by the doctor about her illness. Wasn’t there a scene where she’s saying to Oliver about how “…he (the doctor) didn’t bullshit me about it, you know?” It seemed to me Oliver didn’t want to tell her but she already knew. Or am I misremembering?

Oliver witholds the information from her, when he finds out from the doctor its the reason she can’t get pregnant. For some reason, possibly because she starts to get noticably sicker, she confronts the doctor and he does tell her. By then, Oliver had known for a while.

I saw The Graduate for the first time on TV when I was a teenager in the late 1990s, and it seemed really dated to me then. I thought Benjamin was whiny, self-absorbed, and a totally unlikable protagonist, and that Elaine had nothing going for her except being pretty. The only character I found at all interesting was Mrs. Robinson. I was already familiar with the movie’s reputation, but actually watching it I was astonished that young people in the 1960s had actually identified with Ben and Elaine and rooted for them to get together.

I later learned this was basically what Roger Ebert said when he revisited the movie 30 years after its release. (Here’s his original 1967 review, and the 1997 review.) Since I was only about 17 I don’t think the issue is just that Ebert and other Boomers are much older now, it’s that times had changed.

Incidentally I have seen The Graduate several times since I was a teen and appreciate it more in terms of the quality of the directing and the performances, but I still feel the same way about Ben and Elaine. Both the second AND the third time I saw it I was surprised at how much time was devoted to Ben’s courtship of Elaine, because I found it so boring compared to the Mrs. Robinson scenes that I actually forgot that whole chunk of the movie even existed.

Agree about RWAC…but disagree on TBC.

Breakfast Club’s central themes are still relevant and when viewed through that teen angst/pressure/fear filter it holds up. It’s just the fact that it has a lot of 1980’s in it and the accoutrements and terminology to quantify “cliques” has changed due to technology and time.

But there are most certainly cliques nowadays. They just don’t call them that anymore.

The film is still worth showing as a diversion/subject of discussion in a high school classroom, IMO.

Sorry, people, you’re all wet on this one. Nicolas Ray knew exactly what he was doing.

Just think of it as a period piece, if you like. But admit at least that when Dean’s character responds to a question if he’s ever been on a chicky run: “Yeah, it’s all I ever do.” Or something.

Dean was a hell of a lot worse in Kazan’s East of Eden, I think, if you want whiny little kid. Still a good actor IMO, though. Natalie Wood should get a Razzy for her little stunt in that picture, though. But then you have Jim Backus, so it evens out.

A god. Far funnier than Chaplin and a bigger risk taker than even Harold Lloyd, though Lloyd did spot him half a hand. In that clip, I believe that was the first time that first gag was used, and watch him battle the very real wind. He couldn’t have done that without the wind machine, but he stays so graceful, too. It’s really quite beautiful.

Not just early 20th century…not telling the dying that they are dying, male or female, has been common theme. If I may bring a novel into this movie thread, in Rose in Bloom, a Louisa May Alcott novel from 1876, it’s left to Rose to tel the alcoholic Charlie he is dying, only a few hours before he actually dies. Doctor and rest of family don’t.

Reality Bites. I love complaining about this movie. I think it was dated when it was released (an attempt to capture “Generation X slack” in a movie), but has gotten even worse with time. The supposed “good guys” are intolerable jerks. Ben Stiller’s character, who the movie wishes to portray as a clueless corporate stooge, is the only sympathetic and loving person, and who is just as baffled at slackers as anyone watching the movie now would be. The ending, where Winona Ryder’s heartfelt attempt to make a meaningful TV documentary is turned into a hideous watered-down corporate product… just like Reality Bites.

I’m ashamed to mention that most movies from the “New Hollywood” 60s/70s era just look dated to me.

I disagree. I thing directing styles, movie editing, and movie pacing styles can change over time to the extent that a movie which audiences may have loved when it was released may seem unwatchable to an audience not accustomed to its style.

Also, horror and comedy often don’t age well. Also a matter of changing styles.

Concur with bells on. It’s a two-hour ad for AA, because (I guess) people didn’t know about AA back then. It wouldn’t even be good whittled down to a 30-minute episode of One Day at a Time. Only reason I watched it was because I was once trying to watch all the movies ever referenced in Remington Steele. This one broke me of that.