having trouble getting through a few classics (1 Viewer)

[Terry St]

The acting in the films you mention is actually very good. (Better than Luke at the very least!) If you can stomach a Ben Afleck flick or the Star Wars prequels then there isn't a film in this thread that would should turn you off on the basis of acting alone.

 

[Dan Rudolph]

I'm having trouble understanding how someone can have a problem with retro hair and like Star Wars.

 

[Amy Mormino]

I don't think people should be ashamed to say that they don't like to watch a certain type of film or even films from a certain year, provided they at least give those movies a decent chance first. Film tastes are so individual. If you can't watch a movie without going to sleep a few times (provided that you're not watching at 3AM or something), then its not a classic to you.

I'll admit that a lot of dramatic and art movies bore me, whether they be modern or older "classics". But I do love lots of older movies, so I myself would never have a cut-off date. That said, I'll add that The Maltese Falcon puts me to sleep every time I've tried to see it.

 

[SteveGon]

This has some relevance here:

Q. Your column noted that Columbia TriStar says its upcoming "Three Stooges" DVDs will be released in color and black and white, with the intention to "broaden the appeal of classic black and white films and introduce them to a new generation of viewers."
The obvious implication there is that classic b&w films do not appeal to the average viewer of today's younger generations. I'm in my late 30s and enjoy older films, but find myself in a minority among those within my age group. My parents are in their late 50s. It would appear as though those who are in that age range constitute the last generation of movie watchers to have a sincere desire to watch older b&w films, or older color ones for that matter.

In the next 20 to 25 years, do you believe, with the exception of select films such as "The Wizard of Oz" and "Casablanca," that we will be facing the virtual extinction of old classic films? With money being the bottom line for studios, video release companies, etc., and with the likely decline in the demand for these older movies, will scrounging around for used VHS/DVDs on eBay be the primary avenue for the classic movie fan of the future to find and watch these great films ?

A. There will always be those who love old movies. I meet teenagers who are astonishingly well-informed about the classics. But you are right that many moviegoers and video viewers say they do not "like" black and white films. In my opinion, they are cutting themselves off from much of the mystery and beauty of the movies.

Black and white is an artistic choice, a medium that has strengths and traditions, especially in its use of light and shadow. Moviegoers of course have the right to dislike b&w, but it is not something they should be proud of. It reveals them, frankly, as cinematically illiterate.

I have been described as a snob on this issue. But snobs exclude; they do not include. To exclude b&w from your choices is an admission that you have a closed mind, a limited imagination, or are lacking in taste.

- from Roger Ebert's Movie Answer Man column

 

[JonZ]

I was supposed to read Gone With The Wind in High School. Of course, I decided to wach the movie instead.

I tried 4 times to watch it and everytime I was asleep 20 minutes into it.I was able to get thru it about 8 years ago and I have no desire to ever see it again. IMHO one of the most overrated films of all time.

Alot of the classics are just to "corny" for me to sit thru them. I prefer the realism of late 60s-current films.

 

[Lew Crippen]

Well it is summer (north of the equator) Nick, and as we have only had one thread (that I’ve noticed) begun on this subject, I’m not too surprised at the comment.

Shawn, if you are interested in what some others see in this film, you might like to read this thread.

Not at all a guarantee that you will change your mind, but you might get an understanding of what others see in the film.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

This thread reminds me of a quote I heard years ago (I thought it was really stupid at the time), "I used to think my parents were really dumb. Now that I'm older, I'm amazed at how much they've learned from me over the years".

 

[RobertR]

It's this kind of attitude that's unfathomable to me. You have no interest in thousands of artistic creations simply because "old styles" are ruinously uninteresting? Does that apply to literature, paintings, and other works of art as well? Do you also disdain history older than 15 years? I don't understand this emphasis on the "NOW".

 

[Shawn_KE]

Period styles are what really holds my attention.

I can't get enough of the funky future style that 70's sci fi have. The shag carpet, padded walls, toggle switches and blinking lights.

 

[Fred Bang]

Some classics that I've found hard to watch:

8 1/2 (must be the mono foreign language)

The Seventh Seal

Cries and Whispers

Red Beard.

 

[Andy Sheets]

Didn't Ingmar Bergman once joke that he couldn't stand to watch his movies either?

Personally, I have a lot of trouble watching movies from the New German Cinema, guys like Fassbinder and Wim Wenders. I think it's because many of them are heavily influenced by Brechtian techniques, so their movies (at least the majority of the ones I've seen) are full of actors deliberately pausing and using affected line readings, tons of framing devices...it's a little too successful at keeping me distanced from the story and characters.


Today's movies are bigger, stronger, faster. They hit the gym hard and early during the off-season, use scientifically determined ideal diets, and keep off the non-performance-enhancing drugs!

 

[RobertR]

Yeah, isn't it great that people have shed that creaky old notion that style and appearance don't mean SO much more than substance!

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Dialog, you forgot to mention dialog. It just weighs down those old "classics". Give me a few quips and a couple Burger King cup phrases and I'll be happy. But don't weigh me down with actual conversation and witty reparte, that's why I start to snooze!

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I thought it was great from start to finish - there wasn't one moment it kicked into gear.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

So what happens when you watch modern movies SET in another period? Does this mean you can't stand those either?

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Gotta concur with this opinion. From my review: "I thought it worked better as a cinematic experiment than as an engrossing piece of work. L’Avventura still inspires heaps of praise, and people seem to feel that it really is a rich, incisive work. Perhaps my opinion would change with additional viewings, but right now, I see little depth here. The points made by the characterizations are so obvious that they provide nothing new. While L’Avventura made an admirable attempt to broaden cinematic horizons, the result seemed slow and meandering."

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Those movies are supposed to be set in a different time, as opposed to those other older movies that are set in the time they are ahh...uhh ...uhhm

Nevermind ...

 

[BennyD]

I find this entire thread fascinating. I think a lot of people's love and understanding of movies is a direct result of the context in which they see them. And with regards to the "classics", if seen in a situation that is not ideal it is hard to get through them for a simple reason: they force you to think.

For instance, I'm a youngin' but I was raised around people who could probably act as part time film critics if they ever so chose. While in high school, Magnolia came out and I rented it based off the acclaim it had received. On that initial viewing I made it no further than Cruize's first seminar, though I did appreciate the opening to the film at the time. During that time, my definition of a great film included explosions and catch phrases as criteria.

This past fall I had the opportunity to take an introductory psychology course in college. As part of the course we had movie days to demonstrate certain topics we were learning about. On one day, the professor showed, among others, Tom Cruise's scene from Magnolia where he is interviewed, a scene from Sunset Boulevard, a scene from Kurosawa's Dreams, and a scene from GWTW. As I started thinking about the films they all intrigued me and thus I decided to rent them all and see them. Needless to say that second time through I actually dissected them and grew to appreciate all three. To summarize that long mess, it's very easy to shed things that are unfamiliar aside until they're encountered in the right context.

To get back on topic, Casablanca and GWTW are great films that I can watch multiple times. However, the times I've tried to watch Bergman films or Seven Samurai, I have been unable to make it through the first half hour.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

I'd suggest thinking of older films as "period pieces". You cannot view a 1964 film and think it's supposedly taking place in 2004, for example. It's a story which takes place in 1964. Just like watching a bible film and accepting its olden era, or a western and fully accepting cowboys with hats and riding horses in the 1880s, you can do the same thing with those "old clothes styles, hair, glasses, etc..."

Don't watch DR. NO, for example, and get turned off because it looks old. The movie takes place in 1962 - that's its time frame. It's not supposed to translate into today's look.

 

[Jim Williams]

I recently rented Rear Window and Vertigo mainly because they are two of Hitchcock's most highly regarded films. I could barely stay interested in either one. I know that they are classics and I know that they are considered two of the greatest films ever made, but they did very little for me.