|
Post by clashofchampains on Oct 23, 2011 23:03:55 GMT -5
We have a thread about movies that have aged well, but what about the ones that don't? E.T.- The Extra Terrestrial: The alien isn't really that convincing, full developed of a character besides the fact he's lost and needs to get back home. We don't know that much about him which leads to plot holes like why he and Elliot started to suddenly get sick and how was he able to come back to live? Plus, for the most part, I find the movie now to be a little too sappy and artificial for me. First Spider-Man: While the story is light hearted, it doesn't change the fact that it's pretty cheesy. From the cheesy dialogue and the over the top acting from Dafoe; Spider-Man 1 hasn't aged well. Plus, you have your other cliches like pointless, annoying female characters with Mary Jane along with orgin story cliche. I swear, every orgin movie with the exception of "Iron Man" suffers from this. Once the guy gets their powers and becomes the superhero hero, the writers have no idea what to do with the time left in the movie and it just goes all over the place. Strangely, Sam Raimi's Darkman has aged better than Spiderman. It was more over-the-top yet it has bigger legs as a movie experience on the long run.
|
|
El Hijo De Slapnuts
Samurai Cop
Really waiting for Minoru Suzuki to face off with a live gator.....
Posts: 2,256
|
Post by El Hijo De Slapnuts on Oct 23, 2011 23:09:10 GMT -5
The Spider Man movies for some reason have degraded in my mind for some reason. Maybe my distaste of the third has done it,but the other two aren't looked back as fondly as they should be when I think of them. What if they had Spider-Man suplexing gators? ;D If Spider-Man were to start suplexing gators,the movie would be surely timeless.
|
|
|
Post by clashofchampains on Oct 23, 2011 23:15:59 GMT -5
The Scream movies. I loved them when they came out, but they seem terrible now. I couldn't believe it when they recently made a part 4. . The Scream movies, especially the first one(and the opening of the second one) it's a one viewing type flicks where you had to be there on opening night type thing. The first time was a fantastic experience but most of it comes down to tricking the spectator into a couple of particular emotional moments because of a few shock. Craven showed green skills in doing that but most of the movie is so dependant of the jumps and tension of not knowing where you go that everything is deflated when you try watching it again. In fact THE SECOND TIME I watched Scream it was a completly different more tame movie with no juice, no interest. The first one is a great movie but one you can only watch once. (the same phenomena with Seven)
|
|
|
Post by clashofchampains on Oct 23, 2011 23:21:38 GMT -5
The original Richard Donner/Christopher Reeves Superman movie from 1978. Great for its time, but by modern standards its interpretation of the Superman mythos and superhero movies in general is insanely outdated. I think in the end this is why Superman Returns failed - Bryan Singer was more concerned with modernizing the 70's Superman movie then actually making a modern Superman movie. Actually Superman Returns failed because it tried to take the simplistic ideas of Superman from the 70s and brought them back here yet in a more today movies' monotone, decompressed boring emo style. Hell I wish Superman Returns would have been as fun as those early Chris Reeve flicks!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2011 0:14:49 GMT -5
Mortal Kombat
|
|
|
Post by wcw on Oct 24, 2011 0:23:24 GMT -5
I think there's a difference between a film aging badly, and people not wearing modern clothes. I've never heard anyone look at Casablanca and say 'yeah it's good, but it hasn't aged, it looks so 1940s'. I never got the whole concept of it looks so "Insert Date" being a knock on something. Pictures are snapshots of time and I see movies the same way. Movies from the past shouldn't try to be timeless, there is nothing wrong with being in the moment. A lot of the movies that I love have that dated feel. But I love them for being a part of their own past. Nothing wrong with that. The movies that don't age well are usually big budget action movies of the past that had cutting edge special effects that years later don't look so cutting edge.
|
|
Johnny Flamingo
Hank Scorpio
Killing the business one post at a time
Posts: 6,484
|
Post by Johnny Flamingo on Oct 24, 2011 0:50:45 GMT -5
I'm going to disagree about Batman and Batman Returns. I still think they are the best Batman movies made, at least in my opinion anyway,,,,I watch them quite often and haven't noticed any severe aging other than clothing styles.
I will agree to clueless, bought it on a bargain bin and it has seriously aged. Definitely screams 1990's and just didn't click with me at all and I used to enjoy watching it.
|
|
|
Post by noleafclover1980 on Oct 24, 2011 4:29:01 GMT -5
I went to see The Exorcist in theatre when they re-released the film with additional footage about 5 or 7 years ago(I think?) and I and my friend had never seen the movie and we were disappointed by it. We did not find it scary or discomforting. In fact scariest scene in the whole thing was the added footage of the girl walking like a spider. But that was it. I think people were more religious when it was released, it was a more conservative World and it affected people more deeply because of it. Try 11 years. Unless they re-re-released it since then, the special edition thing came out in theaters around Halloween of 2000.
|
|