MaxxVolume
Lunatic Member
Sure. It is called Pulp Fiction. \\
Yes, like all the people that love Pulp Fiction.
"Pulp Fiction" was 25 years ago, not exactly current....
Sure. It is called Pulp Fiction. \\
Yes, like all the people that love Pulp Fiction.
"Pulp Fiction" was 25 years ago, not exactly current....
I tend to lump almost all movies from the 1960s and first half of the 70s in that category. They were so transparently a reflection of their time that aging poorly almost seems (to me) to be built in.
Exceptions from this period would be movies that aren't set in that period, like the Eastwood westerns, Great Escape, 2001, Young Frankenstein... Mary Poppins, Doctor Zhivago, Sound of Music...
Quadman2 said:Anyone else take in a movie from the past only to find that a lot of the glamour/intrigue had waned after seeing it years after.
I think the lens the show portrays the character through matters. There was never any doubt that Don Draper was an asshole on that show. It wasn't presented as an ideal.
You can't dictate what you derive enjoyment from. If you don't like it, you don't like it.I don't think it's good to forget our past or not derive enjoyment from old films
You can't dictate what you derive enjoyment from. If you don't like it, you don't like it.
I'm with you on this. There are a lot of so-called classic movies from this era that haven't stood the test of time all that well. Easy Rider, for instance, is an excellent example. So is MASH. At least, IMHO.
I'm with you on these exceptions with one notable exception: 2001, to me, is like watching baseball on TV. As a local sportscaster once said, or maybe it was a comedian, "Baseball is the only sport I know of where they can cram five minutes worth of action into three hours."
Many of these movies, it seems to me, are self-consciously art movies. Easy Rider was very self-aware, and it shows in the performances. 2001, with its long, still, passages, strikes me as another one (I often wonder if part of Kubrick's effort was to show off just how dreadfully dull space travel would probably be). I'll take Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove over 2001 any day!!
As far as movies go that haven't aged well, some, like D.W. Griffiths' Birth of a Nation, are, in fact, full-blooded assaults on our modern sensibilities. And it's true: Griffiths was a racist.
Other movies haven't aged well because people are now used to moving pictures. Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat by the Lumière Brothers in 1895, reportedly sent film viewers fleeing from the cinema in panic as they feared getting hit by the train. I find other movies by the Lumière Brothers to be immensely fun, and if you're unfamiliar with their work, I highly recommend the modern flick Hugo, directed by Martin Scorcese.
Im so sorry Q.. I thankfully still love the movies I used to love in the 70s (And even more now)
the crows were pretty clearly meant to represent lazy blacks.
Plenty of way better Holden flicks like, say, Sunset Boulevard.