For the love of movies: The Past, Present, and Future of Cinema and what makes us fans (1 Viewer)

[Jeffrey D]

For me, this has been a mixed bag over the years. I've been part of movie clubs where a group gathers and watches pictures together. I always seem to be the oldest one in the group. So, many times I show films from the 50s, 60s. or 70s and these often flopped with people. Showing 2001 worked out horribly for me once. I think they wanted to throw me out of that group. I showed Manhunter, the Michael Mann film once, and they laughed at it. Showed To Live and Die in LA to another group, they thought the music in the film was obnoxious and ruined the picture. I recall showing The French Connection to a group of people much younger than me and they could not follow the story. There are many scenes without dialogue and then there is some dialogue that is intentionally meant to be confusing "Did you ever sit on the edge of the bed and pick your feet in Poughkeepsie?" a line I quoted many times over the years.

I mean, I'm fine if people don't like a picture I like. That's just a matter of personal taste. However, when some of these folks present themselves as "movie buffs" but then have not seen a picture made before the 1990s...I'm a bit perplexed. I recall once asking one of these groups to name some classic pictures so I could get a feel for what they may like and the first film they named was The Goonies as an "old film" they loved. I knew at that moment I was screwed.

It gave me perspective though. People know and like the things they grew up with. So, there are a lot of people out there for whom Stanley Kubrick is nobody. They have no idea what Citizen Kane is and many if they saw it now would not like it at all.

Dr. Strangelove is probably the picture I have seen the most and the one I name the most when people ask you to name your favorite or one of your favorite films. It is truly one of the pictures that defines filmmaking for me. It's satire, a totally lost art in motion pictures today. So, I mostly will not show that if I am in a film club because, I just expect it won't be well received. I showed it one time and people did not laugh. Which was funny because I have heard Joe Dante tell the story of seeing it when it came out and he said the audience did not laugh, they saw it as a drama.

I recall trying to explain the scene where Sellers is asking Keenan Wynn to shoot the Coca-Cola machine. Nobody thought that was funny. I guess you can watch that scene as Sellers is begging him to shoot the machine so he can make a call to stop the bombs being dropped as a dramatic, but it was always obvious to me that it was meant to be funny.

I just feel like today movies, and I mean in any genre, mostly have to be absolutely crystal clear to the audience about what is going on. I am not talking just comic book pictures, I mean dramas too, any type of film. The primary goal seems to be to make it so obvious it is like being slammed in the face with a baseball bat what the film is about, what the characters are, who is good or right and who is bad or evil. Absolutely no gray areas allowed. The problem being that, if you do confuse the audience or don't explain something entirely, well, you are nearly guaranteed to lose about 50% of your audience right off the top. So, now you have a niche film. A picture that at least half your audience won't like.

Because this is the way that they have been making films now for at least 20 years, I think we have a lot of people that don't understand and can't follow most pictures made before that. There is culturally just too much in them that they don't like, can't follow, don't understand, or take offense to. Combine that with the different editing techniques, the changing music, clothing, phrases or words, effects from past decades and you've just got a universe of things that people now don't enjoy about those pictures.

I do love to show people a picture I love and I hope they will enjoy it but now I generally ask them to name a bunch of pictures they love so that I can grasp what it is they might like that I could suggest. I guess it is like doing the algorithm thing. Making recommendations based on data showing what you have previously watched.

When I was a kid we did not have algorithms selecting anything for us. We watched what was on TV or what was at the cinema. You would go into the picture not knowing it and at the end just decide if you liked it. It did kind of cause you to branch out and like a lot of different kinds of films. It made our tastes more diverse and really the only way that can happen is if you are exposed to a lot of different things. I think there is a ton of choice out there now for people but I am not sure they are taking advantage of that.

Over the past weekend I had a little Toho film festival. I watched monster movies and The Seven Samurai. Being immersed in those films for the weekend was a blast for me. Watching them all in a short span really made me see and think about things I had not thought about before. I know it may not appeal to many people to do that but for me, it was wonderful.

I have been approached on a couple of occasions to put together a program to encourage appreciation of older films. Once about doing a Hitchcock program, because a frustrated professor that worked with my wife was angered that so many of his students did not know Hitchcock and his films. Then another time just to do a history of film thing that would expose younger people to a wide array of older films. I declined in both cases but now, I think it would be even harder to do because so much of film history now is not accepted at all by people and so much of it can be seen as offensive.

So, in order to do a film history appreciation thing, you have to wipe out about 85% of all the pictures made prior to the year 2000. That would not be a film history, that would be a selection of specific films that are the easiest to grasp and have nothing offensive in them. So, in reality, it would be a lie.

Sorry, that was a bunch of rambling thoughts...

Yes I know what you’re saying- to attempt to turn others on to films means you have to be prepared for others to not get or like what you like. I am careful in what I recommend to my buddy or brother- I have a good idea of what they’ll like.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Here's a funny story about one of the movie clubs I was in. In this case, I was not the oldest person in the group. So, a lot of movie clubs start the same way, by asking each member to pick a favorite film or your favorite film. So, the second or third meeting of the group a woman chose Blazing Saddles as her all-time favorite film. Thankfully, it was not me that picked this picture. So, the woman that chose it was a Muslim woman in her 60s. I recall chatting with her before we ran the film and asking her about it. She said no film had ever made her laugh so hard. She was a doctor, highly educated. She laughed just telling me about why she liked the picture.

So, the lights go down, the film starts, we get just a short distance into the picture to this scene:



Suddenly there is a loud "Oh my god!" and then some commotion and someone saying "Turn this off right now!"

Someone stops the picture and turns on the lights. This woman in her 20s is livid. She starts yelling at the 60 year old woman that chose the film "How could you show this filth? This is disgusting! I will not be exposed to this kind of garbage!"

There is some back and forth, some explanation of comedy (never a good sign) and after about 10 minutes of argument it is decided not to show the film.

I just thought, "Well, probably should have seen that coming."

Once upon a time Mel Brooks was seen as a comic genius.

 

[jayembee]

When I was a kid we did not have algorithms selecting anything for us. We watched what was on TV or what was at the cinema. You would go into the picture not knowing it and at the end just decide if you liked it. It did kind of cause you to branch out and like a lot of different kinds of films. It made our tastes more diverse and really the only way that can happen is if you are exposed to a lot of different things. I think there is a ton of choice out there now for people but I am not sure they are taking advantage of that.

I hear you. Over at The Other Site, there was a news item presenting Criterion's announcements for August. And, as happens every freaking month that Criterion announces their latest titles, there are people who respond with "I've never heard of any of these movies". Which isn't a problem, per se. There are some films Criterion announces that I haven't heard of, either. But one can hear the disdain in people's voices when they say "I've never heard of any of these movies", as if it means that any movie they haven't heard of can't be worth anything.

Few people, if any, seem to realize that no one ever hears about any movie -- even the ones they end up loving -- until someone else brings it up, whether in a discussion or seeing a trailer. And few people, if any, seem to believe that "I've never heard of any of these movies" represents an implicit invitation to try something new.

The old saying about horses and water continues to be true.

 

[uncledougie]

People have to be willing and open minded toward exposure to vintage or classic films, and if all they know is from the last 15-20 years, it’s no wonder films from the 30s to 70s could seem entirely alien to them. You have to know the past to bring context to modern day films, and lament the dumbing down of the majority of films released nowadays. Yes, there’s a place for comic book fodder and slasher horror thrillers, but so much is lowest common denominator oriented for short attention spans, it’s inevitable that something like 2001: A Space Odyssey doesn’t cater to an audience seeking mind numbing nonstop action. I have tried to choose as wide a variety of films as possible to show the four now twenty-something nephews, and it has led them toward a deep appreciation of cinema history from the silent era onward. Examples we’ve watched just in the last few weeks include Notorious, Arsenic and Old Lace, Love Letters, The Long, Long Trailer, What’s Up, Doc?, Sabrina, Nashville, The Great Escape, Charade, Camelot, Once Upon a Time in the West, The Greatest Show on Earth, Judgment at Nuremberg, The Manchurian Candidate, The Train, In the Heat of the Night, There’s No Business Like Show Business, and just last night Holiday. That’s just the latest tip of the iceberg of films I’ve shown the nephews, and obviously many if not most of the titles are ones they’d never know to seek out, although their awareness and interests are now broad enough that some of the movies were by request from one of the boys. Next up by request: Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner. I must say it’s extremely gratifying to share the films with the nephews, and to see the appreciation of great stars of the past like Cary Grant and Katharine Hepburn (Holiday) as well as the irreplaceable directors (Alfred Hitchcock, Billy Wilder, Stanley Donen, John Frankenheimer, Vincente Minnelli, George Cukor, et al.). If I can pass along a small portion of my passion for films to a new generation, it is a bond to connect and cultural touchstones to preserve.

 

[jayembee]

Yes I know what you’re saying- to attempt to turn others on to films means you have to be prepared for others to not get or like what you like. I am careful in what I recommend to my buddy or brother- I have a good idea of what they’ll like.

I've gotten to the point where I rarely recommend anything. If someone asks for my opinion, whether it be for a film, a TV show, a book, whatever, I tend to say "I liked it" or "I didn't like it", and maybe explain what it is about it that made me feel that way. I don't ever say "You have to see it".

I love my wife dearly, but I rarely try to convince her to see something. She doesn't have the passion for film that I do, so convincing her to spend the time -- she has her own interests that she wants to spend time on -- can be a lost cause. I feel triumphant on the occasions that she comes into the living room while I'm watching something, and ends up getting hooked into it with no prompting from me. I'm sure that she'd like a lot of the movies I do, but she has to find it out on her own.

 

[benbess]

....I have been approached on a couple of occasions to put together a program to encourage appreciation of older films. Once about doing a Hitchcock program, because a frustrated professor that worked with my wife was angered that so many of his students did not know Hitchcock and his films. Then another time just to do a history of film thing that would expose younger people to a wide array of older films. I declined in both cases but now, I think it would be even harder to do because so much of film history now is not accepted at all by people and so much of it can be seen as offensive....

I'm sort-of putting this to the test myself in a few months, because I've finally decided to teach a film noir class online/distance-ed this Fall. In the past I've had success with students who are mostly 18-22 teaching classes on Animated Film, Hitchcock, Spielberg, etc. In their student movie reviews and discussions they often criticize what's sometimes called "outdated cultural depictions," and rightly so from my pov, but overall they've still mostly enjoyed the older films. They do seem shocked sometimes at how different movies from before the 2000s are from movies today, but they still often get into them.

But we are going to be newly tested with film noir. I'm already anticipating that this class might be one of those "one and done" situations. The class did fill up, and even had people on the waiting lists, but when I sent out an email to all of them saying, more or less, just to be clear most of what we are going to be watching are black and white crime films from the 1940s and 1950s—well, not surprisingly, several students dropped immediately lol! Anyway, part of what I'm going to try to do is pick my movies carefully, but even so....

 

[Sultanofcinema]

Folks, I have read your stories about running movies, attempting to hope that your audience likes the films you like. I have been running films at the Library once a month for a lot of people who listen to my radio show and are fans of classic films. I have five boys, all grown up and they are movie fans and collectors. For 17 years as they went thru grammar school, high school and college, I've had a packed house along with their friends, every Friday and Saturday night with me choosing the film. Night Of The Hunter, Amarcord, The Thin Man, Bullitt, and on and on. I have never had any issues with people being insulted or offended. I know my audience and will run in some cases films I know they want to see. I started my boys off with classic cartoons and worked them up over the years thru the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's and 70's and we always had discussions afterwards. I've always felt this is the way to introduce them to an appreciation of movies and bring them up slowly. You can't run The Terminator and then the next night The Great Escape. It doesn't work, they would be bored. I've shown them Roger Corman, Bruce Lee, John Woo, Fellini, Kubrick, Bergman, etc and they have always had a fascination with the different styles and the way each director tells stories. I NEVER stop, rewind or have an intermission in ANY film. I run them all the way thru to the end credits with no one ever getting up. I recently attended an incredible screening of From Russia With Love at the Alamo Draft House with a sold out audience. They had the same reaction I experienced when I first saw this theatrically. It was wonderful.

 

[Jeffrey D]

People have to be willing and open minded toward exposure to vintage or classic films, and if all they know is from the last 15-20 years, it’s no wonder films from the 30s to 70s could seem entirely alien to them. You have to know the past to bring context to modern day films, and lament the dumbing down of the majority of films released nowadays. Yes, there’s a place for comic book fodder and slasher horror thrillers, but so much is lowest common denominator oriented for short attention spans, it’s inevitable that something like 2001: A Space Odyssey doesn’t cater to an audience seeking mind numbing nonstop action. I have tried to choose as wide a variety of films as possible to show the four now twenty-something nephews, and it has led them toward a deep appreciation of cinema history from the silent era onward. Examples we’ve watched just in the last few weeks include Notorious, Arsenic and Old Lace, Love Letters, The Long, Long Trailer, What’s Up, Doc?, Sabrina, Nashville, The Great Escape, Charade, Camelot, Once Upon a Time in the West, The Greatest Show on Earth, Judgment at Nuremberg, The Manchurian Candidate, The Train, In the Heat of the Night, There’s No Business Like Show Business, and just last night Holiday. That’s just the latest tip of the iceberg of films I’ve shown the nephews, and obviously many if not most of the titles are ones they’d never know to seek out, although their awareness and interests are now broad enough that some of the movies were by request from one of the boys. Next up by request: Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner. I must say it’s extremely gratifying to share the films with the nephews, and to see the appreciation of great stars of the past like Cary Grant and Katharine Hepburn (Holiday) as well as the irreplaceable directors (Alfred Hitchcock, Billy Wilder, Stanley Donen, John Frankenheimer, Vincente Minnelli, George Cukor, et al.). If I can pass along a small portion of my passion for films to a new generation, it is a bond to connect and cultural touchstones to preserve.

I’ve been trying to get my buddy to watch What’s Up, Doc?- he seems to like films that have car chases, and I was telling him about the wild segment near the end of the film. Hopefully he’ll watch it.

 

[benbess]

What's Up Doc? is still really good imho. I showed it to my daughter a few years ago, and she was amused. The car chase at the end is epic, esp. bc there's no cgi "help".

 

[Sultanofcinema]

What's Up Doc was a film I ran several times for many different large crowds and it was always a hit.

 

[uncledougie]

What’s Up. Doc? was a big hit with the two nephews, one of whom had never seen a Streisand movie and was appreciative of her comedic chops. I’d previously shown them Bringing Up Baby, to which Bogdanovich was offering this updated homage, and that enhanced their appreciation of both films in retrospect. Of course afterwards there had to be explanations of why the “love means never having to say you’re sorry” exchange was such a knee slapper at the time, since such references are unique to the times and can’t really translate so far removed. I need to dig out the DVD of Paper Moon now to follow up, since that Blu-ray upgrade is sorely missing still.

 

[Sultanofcinema]

Interesting that you mention the line from Love Story which would be lost on most audiences today. I just watched From Russia With Love At The Alamo Draft House two weeks ago with a sold out audience. The line that Connery/Bond delivers " I think One of their aircraft is missing" which relates to the book and the Powell/Pressburger film. One of the few lines that people will always be able to relate to is the Connery/Bond line in Goldfinger about "drinking dom Perignon above the tempreture of 38 degrees Farenheit. That's just as bad as listening to the Beatles without earmuffs"

 

[BobO'Link]

I've introduced my grandkids to lots of classic cinema and they've mostly enjoyed it all (genre depending). They accept BW movies as easily as color - especially after I stopped a Three Stooges short after my middle granddaughter (then ~8yo), who was laughing so hard she could barely breath, looked at me and said "These would be funnier if they were in color!" and was given the "Funny is funny and it doesn't matter if it's in BW or color. How could you laugh harder at these?" speech. She agreed and the matter was never brought up again. They've seen dozens of older (30s-80s) movies.

My grandson (now 19) absolutely loves Blazing Saddles and sees it for what it is. He didn't quite know what to make of the content during his first viewing but as the film progressed he realized it's a satire and ended the viewing with "That's the funniest thing I've ever seen! You'd never be able to make this movie today! People just wouldn't get it." I fully agree. The ability to watch such product has been lost by most people as today's audience seems to take everything literally (and it's more of an age group thing, with the 15-35 year olds who seem to be the most easily offended, especially by a movie made before their time, and have the least ability to recognize satire).

A ~30yo coworker who'd never watched *any* BW movies *because* they were BW saw the light after watching the "right" selection of BW films. She loves horror movies so I gave her a curated group of BW horror films. She brought them back with a "Wow! Those were really good! Do you have more?" Of course I have more... so I gave her more, adding some SF, comedy, and noir to the mix. She liked every single one and now seeks out such product on her own. Those BW films also opened her eyes to color films from the 30s to 60s, things she'd previously ignored as being "too old."

I know people my age, people who grew up in the BW TV era, who refuse to watch *any* "old" movie and, especially, any that are BW. I just don't get it... The story is the main thing and its age or whether or not it's in color is quite secondary.

From what I've observed, most people have lost, or have never had, the ability to view films in the context of the time in which they were made. That's an incredibly important thing to have to be able to watch *any* product produced in a time outside your own. If you're unable to do that you'll either be offended by, not understand, and/or just not appreciate anything that's not within your limited bubble of experience or world view.

 

[Sultanofcinema]

I've introduced my grandkids to lots of classic cinema and they've mostly enjoyed it all (genre depending). They accept BW movies as easily as color - especially after I stopped a Three Stooges short after my middle granddaughter (then ~8yo), who was laughing so hard she could barely breath, looked at me and said "These would be funnier if they were in color!" and was given the "Funny is funny and it doesn't matter if it's in BW or color. How could you laugh harder at these?" speech. She agreed and the matter was never brought up again. They've seen dozens of older (30s-80s) movies.

My grandson (now 19) absolutely loves Blazing Saddles and sees it for what it is. He didn't quite know what to make of the content during his first viewing but as the film progressed he realized it's a satire and ended the viewing with "That's the funniest thing I've ever seen! You'd never be able to make this movie today! People just wouldn't get it." I fully agree. The ability to watch such product has been lost by most people as today's audience seems to take everything literally (and it's more of an age group thing, with the 15-35 year olds who seem to be the most easily offended, especially by a movie made before their time, and have the least ability to recognize satire).

A ~30yo coworker who'd never watched *any* BW movies *because* they were BW saw the light after watching the "right" selection of BW films. She loves horror movies so I gave her a curated group of BW horror films. She brought them back with a "Wow! Those were really good! Do you have more?" Of course I have more... so I gave her more, adding some SF, comedy, and noir to the mix. She liked every single one and now seeks out such product on her own. Those BW films also opened her eyes to color films from the 30s to 60s, things she'd previously ignored as being "too old."

I know people my age, people who grew up in the BW TV era, who refuse to watch *any* "old" movie and, especially, any that are BW. I just don't get it... The story is the main thing and its age or whether or not it's in color is quite secondary.

From what I've observed, most people have lost, or have never had, the ability to view films in the context of the time in which they were made. That's an incredibly important thing to have to be able to watch *any* product produced in a time outside your own. If you're unable to do that you'll either be offended by, not understand, and/or just not appreciate anything that's not within your limited bubble of experience or world view.

You've made a lot of great points that I always have to deal with in having film discussions with people who want their screen filled (they actually watch JAWS flat), will not watch anything in B & W (these folks claim they watch A Christmas Carol, It's A Wonderful Life or even some of the Bogart/Cagney films in Color? Tinted/B & W films are NOT EVER in Color) or a foreign film with subtitles. A guy heard me talking about The Godfather on the radio years ago and I actually ran into him as he recognized my voice from Radio. He said he had watched The Godfather and was very bored and disappointed with it. The first question I asked was where and how he watched it. He watched the film over a period of two weeks at 15 min intervals on his cell phone during breaks. I told him we both saw something different, he didn't understand and I explained the proper way and setting of watching a motion picture. I asked him when he saw it properly, I would discuss it with him and even invited him over for a showing. I think he was angry and I'm wondering if this is the way a lot of this generation view films.

 

[uncledougie]

You've made a lot of great points that I always have to deal with in having film discussions with people who want their screen filled (they actually watch JAWS flat), will not watch anything in B & W (these folks claim they watch A Christmas Carol, It's A Wonderful Life or even some of the Bogart/Cagney films in Color? Tinted/B & W films are NOT EVER in Color) or a foreign film with subtitles. A guy heard me talking about The Godfather on the radio years ago and I actually ran into him as he recognized my voice from Radio. He said he had watched The Godfather and was very bored and disappointed with it. The first question I asked was where and how he watched it. He watched the film over a period of two weeks at 15 min intervals on his cell phone during breaks. I told him we both saw something different, he didn't understand and I explained the proper way and setting of watching a motion picture. I asked him when he saw it properly, I would discuss it with him and even invited him over for a showing. I think he was angry and I'm wondering if this is the way a lot of this generation view films.

Welcome to the attention deficit era. If the fellow had been smart, he’d have taken you up on your offer. No film is going to be anything other than an incoherent mishmash of scenes watched on a phone over a period of two weeks. Certainly a film with the depth and complexity of The Godfather is one of the worst victims of this type exposure. Even as a child, I’d sit through the Exit Music of the roadshow films and savor every moment of the entire experience. To this day I sit through the end credits, not to read every name of every gaffer, but to know that I’ve seen the entirety of what the filmmakers produced (plus I learned to occasionally expect the unexpected after Airplane! and Howard Jarvis had me encouraging those who hadn’t seen it not to get up when the credits rolled).
Kudos to BobO’Link and the astute observation one must take oneself out of our narrow circle of time and space to truly appreciate films which may reflect the mores and conventions of another era or society long lost to modern sensibilities. We can learn a lot by observing and tracing the evolution of cinema. To quote The Go-Between: “The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.” To be open to it is to enrich our present in incalculable ways.

 

[Sultanofcinema]

Welcome to the attention deficit era. If the fellow had been smart, he’d have taken you up on your offer. No film is going to be anything other than an incoherent mishmash of scenes watched on a phone over a period of two weeks. Certainly a film with the depth and complexity of The Godfather is one of the worst victims of this type exposure. Even as a child, I’d sit through the Exit Music of the roadshow films and savor every moment of the entire experience. To this day I sit through the end credits, not to read every name of every gaffer, but to know that I’ve seen the entirety of what the filmmakers produced (plus I learned to occasionally expect the unexpected after Airplane! and Howard Jarvis had me encouraging those who hadn’t seen it not to get up when the credits rolled).
Kudos to BobO’Link and the astute observation one must take oneself out of our narrow circle of time and space to truly appreciate films which may reflect the mores and conventions of another era or society long lost to modern sensibilities. We can learn a lot by observing and tracing the evolution of cinema. To quote The Go-Between: “The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.” To be open to it is to enrich our present in incalculable ways.

AGREED!

 

[Sultanofcinema]

I can remember always sitting thru credits in the 60's, 70's and 80'a with various friends. They were confused by this and would wait for me in the lobby or outside and then question me about it. I've made a lot of ushers angry at 2nd showings at night because they wanted to get out of the theater and go home. Last year at Top Gun Maverick, the usher was annoyed, had swept up around me and then started banking the broom together with the pick up pan. I leaned forward until the lights came up, looked at him and said, "now the film is over".

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I would like to humbly suggest that perhaps we take a moment to consider and respect that not everyone wishes, enjoys, or has the time, to consume media (whether that be film, television, music or anything else) in the same way.

When we say things to imply that people aren’t watching things in the right way, or suggest people have attention deficit, or aren’t smart, that doesn’t necessarily inspire the targets of those comments to want to engage with us in a meaningful, constructive way.

And though this may not be want everyone wants to hear, The Godfather is a 51 year old movie. Think about what was most meaningful to you when you were younger. Did you grow up mostly preferring material that was contemporary to you, or did you prefer material that was over half a century old? Throughout human history, the majority of people a majority of the time engage with material that is contemporary to them.

To be interested in film appreciation should not mean that one must only be asked to appreciate material made decades before their birth. What’s so wrong with the idea that there are fans of films of today who wish to engage that material on a deeper level?

I don’t mean to sound cranky or judgmental but I also dislike this idea that only things from previous eras are worthy of discussion and appreciation.

 

[Sultanofcinema]

In this case, we can compare Fast X (2023) to The Godfather (1971). CGI makes me sleepy as do most of the overlong comic book films. I grew up watching real staged fistfights, action sequences and car chases. People have limited attention that I saw starting with MTV. It escalated with Cell phones and the internet (instant gratification). Which one will we remember in another 50 years? I had someone I knew as an usher at a theater years ago come out of a movie called Wild Hogs, telling it was great. So I said to him, " like Chinatown?". It's always interesting to discuss why folks like the films they do and we have our own tastes, according to how we grew up and our life experiences. I understand a lot of folks I know well who grew up with Roger Moore as Bond and like him the best. Makes perfect sense. For me, it's Sean Connery, Lazenby and then Dalton.

 

[Joe Wong]

I would like to humbly suggest that perhaps we take a moment to consider and respect that not everyone wishes, enjoys, or has the time, to consume media (whether that be film, television, music or anything else) in the same way.

When we say things to imply that people aren’t watching things in the right way, or suggest people have attention deficit, or aren’t smart, that doesn’t necessarily inspire the targets of those comments to want to engage with us in a meaningful, constructive way.

And though this may not be want everyone wants to hear, The Godfather is a 51 year old movie. Think about what was most meaningful to you when you were younger. Did you grow up mostly preferring material that was contemporary to you, or did you prefer material that was over half a century old? Throughout human history, the majority of people a majority of the time engage with material that is contemporary to them.

To be interested in film appreciation should not mean that one must only be asked to appreciate material made decades before their birth. What’s so wrong with the idea that there are fans of films of today who wish to engage that material on a deeper level?

I don’t mean to sound cranky or judgmental but I also dislike this idea that only things from previous eras are worthy of discussion and appreciation.

Agreed.

That was one reason I posted earlier in another thread that an opinion of a creative work (the example used was a toddler vs Rembrandt, etc.) can't be wrong. One person may prefer the toddler's work, the other 99.99% may like the Rembrandt. It's simply a preference.

To each their own, I often say.